Aspies vs NTs?

[harrietjansson]

Howdy folks!
Many people on this forum seem to be "aspies vs NTs". Personally, I don't even believe in something called NT as it is not a homogeneous group at all. Not that aspies are a homogeneous group at all. We are at least more heterogeneous.
It's so complex.
Why this "aspies vs NTs"?

Eg. Neurotypicals mutually accepting apparently contradicting thoughts
Having your differences be dismissed by neurotypicals
ASD/NT relationships - NTs need for validation

I have met many so called NTs who did not prefer big groups. Many of them did not really like parties that much. One person said that he could deal with the situation if he had to. Many NTs don't even care much about being extremely social. That's just a steretype. Many aspies do like parties.

 

[Misery]

I think it's because of what I often refer to as the "hivemind".

It's a natural part of psychology for people to want to be part of a group... well, in NTs anyway. For those on the spectrum, this instinct seems to be, uh... broken? Deactivated? Whatever the case, those on the spectrum very often couldnt give less of a fart about being a part of some group or trend. But for NTs, it's all about this. USUALLY. There are always exceptions to every rule. Dont ever forget that.

And for quite a few of us here, we've run into such a ridiculous number of rather interchangeable people that they all sort of blend together into one homogenous lump. For instance, I cant think of even one NT that I've met who does not fall into these categories: A: likes movies. B: likes sports. C: watches a lot of TV. D: drinks, usually with friends, because apparently that's how alcohol works. E: has few extraneous interests (as in, interests not shared by other NTs around them), provided they have any whatsoever (spoiler, I cant think of anyone I've met that DOES have one). F: never, EVER shuts up about politics, if the topic is even slightly breached. G: will Do Things they absolutely hate (for instance, going to a party at the house of some person they strongly dislike), just so that they can remain part of "the group". I genuinely cant think of even one person I've met who does not follow ALL of those rules.

This is SO ridiculously prevalent that it means that so many people are very, VERY predictable. Even people I've never met before, usually, I am already aware of their behavior patterns and such. It's incredibly rare that I turn out to be wrong.

And that's the "hivemind". Be a part of the group (note that this is different from "be social"). Dont be "weird". CONFORM. It's merely a natural psychological phenomenon.

Whereas those on the spectrum tend to A: not care, or B: not notice, when it comes to whether or not something is popular or whatever. Sure, our interests can absolutely align with that of NTs, but it's usually just sheer chance, rather than "because they're doing it". Our interests tend to vary wildly, and can attach to all sorts of random things.


People always talk a lot about how bad stereotypes are, but looking at it from a purely logical point of view: stereotypes come into being for a reason. That reason is usually a sort of behavior (or PERCEIVED behavior in some cases) simply being very common among a particular group. The idea of those on the spectrum having meltdowns, for instance, is a stereotype. Thing is... a LOT of us really DO have them. Another stereotype is us having obsessions, and... yeah, we usually do. Those stereotypes popped up not at random, but due to how very common those traits are for us.

The PROBLEM is when said stereotypes become warped and inaccurate, or exaggerated. For instance, yes, we have meltdowns, but it doesnt always involve screaming and flailing around. That's a stereotype that has SOME truth to it, but is essentially going off of incomplete data because people never do their bloody research.


That's just my thoughts on it, anyway.

 

[Tom]

I wouldn't say many. I think it is more like just a few. And there are probably always going to be a few. We are people after all, not angelic beings. Btw, none of the people who started those threads seem to be posting any more. You get those type posts from time to time, hardly anyone agrees with them and they fizzle out.

Threads of that nature may also be in violation of site rules, and can be reported:

General Rules & Guidelines

 

[The Pandector]

Full disclosure. I've seen this troubling attitude developing in myself this year (my first year of diagnosishood.) I have a very limited circle of friends, all of whom are NT. So I'm conflicted by this attitude welling up in me.

I am in awe of Misery's entry. I agree with all of it but would add one thing.

The PROBLEM is when said stereotypes become warped and inaccurate, or exaggerated.

It's also what we do with it. Stereotypes are a natural function of observation and generalization... not something I'm able to turn off. But when stereotypes are used to judge individuals in ways that have impact on them... before the individual has actually displayed whatever propensity... this also is when problems arise.

 

[harrietjansson]

I think it's because of what I often refer to as the "hivemind".

It's a natural part of psychology for people to want to be part of a group... well, in NTs anyway. For those on the spectrum, this instinct seems to be, uh... broken? Deactivated? Whatever the case, those on the spectrum very often couldnt give less of a fart about being a part of some group or trend. But for NTs, it's all about this. USUALLY. There are always exceptions to every rule. Dont ever forget that.

I want to be part of a group.
Do you even have a definition of NT? You can't just say that NT refers to people without autism (and add/adhd). That would make a schizoid person an NT.
Who are the NTs?

The PROBLEM is when said stereotypes become warped and inaccurate, or exaggerated. For instance, yes, we have meltdowns, but it doesnt always involve screaming and flailing around. That's a stereotype that has SOME truth to it, but is essentially going off of incomplete data because people never do their bloody research.


That's just my thoughts on it, anyway.

not all aspies have meltdowns. I talked with one who never had a meltdown. He did not even know what it was untill I mentioned it to him.

 

[harrietjansson]

It's also what we do with it. Stereotypes are a natural function of observation and generalization... not something I'm able to turn off. But when stereotypes are used to judge individuals in ways that have impact on them... before the individual has actually displayed whatever propensity... this also is when problems arise.

I have never been able to define NT. That is the first issue. Then most people who I guess could be refered to as NTs are not even a homogeniuos group.

 

[Aspychata]

Everybody who wants to be overly concerned and pushy around me l label as NT. Everyone who seems to listen and doesnt have a hidden agenda, 30% chance of ND, 70% chance of NT.

 

[Nervous Rex]

I think of the groups as clouds. When we talk about NTs and ASDs, it's easy to perceive a border - just the same way that it's easy to perceive the edge of a cloud from miles away.

But when you get up close, you'll find that the cloud doesn't have a solid border. It just thins out until you can't see it. You can still find plenty of water droplets "outside" the cloud.

It's the same with the NTs. There is a clear clustering of behaviors and norms. That doesn't mean there aren't outliers - but it does give us a large group of people that it's easy to lump together under one description.

And with Aspies - there are rigidly-defined criteria for diagnosis, so there is a conceptual cloud, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of outliers either.

Aspie's bristle* at being typified as two-dimensional caricatures and like to say, "If you've met one Aspie, you've met one Aspie". I'm sure it would also be wrong to dismiss 84% of humanity as "Normal" just because they fall within that conceptual cloud.

(*Here I go generalizing, in the middle of my soapbox speech about not generalizing. Blame it on my conceptual cloud.)

 

[Au Naturel]

There ought not to be any "versus" about it. "Versus" is the failure of acceptance. If it comes down to a fight, we lose.

I see quite a bit of harmful stereotyping of the spectrum by NTs and I see quite a bit of stereotyping of NTs by people on the spectrum. It goes both ways.

 

[Tom]

But just for the record, if it ever did come to Aspies vs NTs the winner would be:

 

[Judge]

Howdy folks!
Personally, I don't even believe in something called NT as it is not a homogeneous group at all.

"Neurotypical" nebulously defines those who are neither on the spectrum of autism or has any intellectual or developmental differences. Not much homogeneity in that. People fitting this huge ambiguous group can have any number of maladies and quirks of behavior. That much is true.

Though this doesn't negate that we're talking about people who are NOT autistic. A huge number of persons in comparison. Where a disparity in our numbers lies at the heart of our struggle to be accepted by others who are so likely to expect or demand that we conform to their process of thought as an overwhelming social- and neurological majority.

Us vs. them? Sounds like a proposition only Lt. Colonel George Armstrong Custer would have welcomed.

We don't have the numbers to openly confront them or expect them to understand us. But I believe we should be mindful of this disparity that gives them such an edge over our existence. Always being aware of only explaining or defending your autism on a need-to-know basis only.

 

[Fino]

Are you just trying to say that not all NTs are identical and not all autistic people are identical?

 

[Misery]

I want to be part of a group.
Do you even have a definition of NT? You can't just say that NT refers to people without autism (and add/adhd). That would make a schizoid person an NT.
Who are the NTs?

As @Judge said, "NT" means "neurotypical". And it definitely does have a definition. Indeed, a schizoid person would not be an NT. For a better, more exact definition, and info on subjects related to it, I suggest you look elsewhere on the Net. There's plenty of good reading that can be done about the subject (naturally, it's one of those very well explored concepts) from the point of view of people who are actually professionals.

not all aspies have meltdowns. I talked with one who never had a meltdown. He did not even know what it was untill I mentioned it to him.

Yes, I know. That's part of what I was getting at. And it's why I said "There are always exceptions to every rule. Never forget that". Heck, I dont experience meltdowns myself. I have shutdowns, which are the opposite.

It's also part of why I brought up the idea of some stereotypes going off of incomplete data. But at the same time, even if a stereotype is "accurate", at no point does that mean it's the case for literally everyone in that group... the very idea of that makes no sense.

Stereotypes dont come from the fact of literally everyone in a particular group sharing a particular trait: They come from the fact of a particular trait being very COMMON in that group. "Common" does not mean "applies to all". Blanket statements never work, I tell ya that.

 

[Major Tom]

Just like anywhere, you'll find toxic people and toxic views. I avoid them. They aren't worth the time or energy. It doesn't matter "NT" or "ND". You'll never change their beliefs it's a waste of precious time and energy. It's far better to go take a walk or something. Don't let stereotypical attitudes effect you, that's exactly what they want.

 

[The Pandector]

Just like anywhere, you'll find toxic people and toxic views. I avoid them. They aren't worth the time or energy. It doesn't matter "NT" or "ND". You'll never change their beliefs it's a waste of precious time and energy. It's far better to go take a walk or something. Don't let stereotypical attitudes effect you, that's exactly what they want.

I agree, Major, and admire your wha. I’m new at this and am deeply affected by being judged negatively, having spent my entire life trying to be normal. It simply is not in my repertoire to walk and forget this monumental undertaking. Even if I take the walk, it is in response to their judgment; I am impacted.

Your words are inspirational, with those of some others around here who are able to live that blessed equilibrium (you know who you are.) I will strive to reach that stable orbit.

 

[The Pandector]

... he said through fiery tears.

 

[Aneka]

I like the metaphor of a cloud thinning out, or maybe fog, there is no clear border, and water droplets are spread out unevenly.

Every person differs from the norm in certain ways because the norm is just hypothetical statistics. If you fit the norm, you're extraordinary. Someone once looked for Mr. Average and failed. He wanted to find a person who was average in every department.

 

[Magna]

I don't have an us vs. them mentality. It would be foolish to exclude or be bigoted towards NTs for many reasons including: They comprise approximately 98% of the planet's humans, there are many NTs that provide valuable, necessary and meaningful contributions to the lives of autistic people including in my own case.

I do firmly believe, however, that if an autistic person such as myself prefers to fraternize with other autistic people over NTs (but not to the exclusion of them), such a desire is not "us vs. them" or bigoted any more than if a non-hearing person preferred to fraternize with other non-hearing people, or a black person preferred to fraternize with other black people.

Without question I communicate easier and better with neurodiverse people in general than I do with NTs. This is a fact that's been true in both online communication and in face to face communication.

Conventional thought is that autistic people have difficulty in social communication, period. This is incorrect. They have difficulty with communicating with NTs. However, there's been at least one study that showed that autistics do not have difficulty or at least find it easier communicating with other ND people and also showed at the same time that NTs have difficulty communicating with NDs.

I believe it's a form of ableism to shame or castigate autistic people for preferring the company of other autistic people for the following reasons:

• Men often have a group of other men as their inner circle of friends. Why? They prefer to have other men as their inner circle of friends.
• Women often have a group of other women as their inner circle of friends. Why? They prefer to have other women as their inner circle of friends.
• African Americans often prefer to fraternize with other African Americans.
• Non-hearing people often prefer to fraternize with other non-hearing people.
• Actors, comedians and musicians often prefer to fraternize with other actors, comedians and musicians respectively.
• Soldiers and veterans will often prefer to fraternize with other soldiers and veterans.
• People who like horses will often prefer to fraternize with other people who like horses.
• There are countless examples that can be used like those above.

It would be ableist to say it's wrong, bad, bigoted, etc for someone who is autistic to say they prefer the company of other autistics.

 

[WildCat]

It's the path of least resistance. Less effort to place people into neat little boxes instead of understanding anything. Works better on robots if you ask me, not flesh puppets.

You get people who are not like that at all who are tactful and take time to actually listen to others. We have and had some people here who fit that description.

Then there are people - both neurodiverse and neurotypical - who come in a place like this every once in a while and are somewhat antagonistic for some reason. Better to simply ignore them than to feed them and participate with them.

 

[Aspychata]

"Neurotypical" nebulously defines those who are neither on the spectrum of autism or has any intellectual or developmental differences. Not much homogeneity in that. People fitting this huge ambiguous group can have any number of maladies and quirks of behavior. That much is true.

Though this doesn't negate that we're talking about people who are NOT autistic. A huge number of persons in comparison. Where a disparity in our numbers lies at the heart of our struggle to be accepted by others who are so likely to expect or demand that we conform to their process of thought as an overwhelming social- and neurological majority.

Us vs. them? Sounds like a proposition only Lt. Colonel George Armstrong Custer would have welcomed.

We don't have the numbers to openly confront them or expect them to understand us. But I believe we should be mindful of this disparity that gives them such an edge over our existence. Always being aware of only explaining or defending your autism on a need-to-know basis only.

Thank you explaining what my pea brain thought but couldn't quite find conceptually how to express it.