King_oni - Thank you - very true and interesting point.
How do you (as in you specifically) determine which things to share?
I'm actually quite good at this (relatively), as I can easily learn what people find interesting and stick to those topics. It's actually easier to meet new people, because all I have to do is find out what interests them and stick to those topics. New people are easier because people that I've known for a while are boring, and thus more difficult to talk to (although can be fun to interact with by watching TV together or playing video games).
Upon meeting someone for the first time, I find it quite enjoyable to gauge competencies based on the logic in their statements alone. This is one of the few things that can cause a genuine smile of great amusement once I've figured them out. Next, their relative intelligence (in my biased opinion) determines the level at which I find them interesting, and also the level at which I will score the accuracy of their information. In this way, I can emulate "common sense" by allowing their information into my models and attributing a statistical probability to their insights. Indeed, you can also gauge how much useful/accurate "common sense" a person possesses by observing their relationships, moods etc. People who are happy generally have more "common sense" in my estimation, although it could also be they're oblivious. Indeed, ignorance is bliss.
In relationships, I'm fun to hang out with because I simply follow my keen sense of empathy and stick to what interests them. However, what I'm now realizing is that anytime I state a fact, I am saying, "I know something you don't". While neurotypicals do this all the time it's also not considered socially "smart" to do so by their peers.
What I'm now considering is that perhaps the best way to do this is by limiting myself to veiling insight through questions instead of making statements. This is often as easy as changing my comment from "I think..." to "Do you think...". This allows me to share information, while appearing to be simply "thinking" about something rather than "knowing" something. I have observed that they are much more comfortable with this - the trick is to modulate my vocal inflection so that my questions sound ponderous rather than challenging.
However, prior to realizing that I'm different, my strong moral sense wasn't comfortable with essentially manipulating people, and thus I never adopted this technique completely. I'm often aware of people being bored or irritated when I'm having fun explaining something. I know I should stop talking or exit the conversation, but my "common sense" tells me that, "If I can make them understand , they will cease to be annoyed."
And so, this is what I mean when I say assuming that somebody will understand me is the root of pain and confusion.
I've also finally seen what "taking things literally" really means. I've never struggled with idioms, I like them and find them fun to use.
Two days after learning about the spectrum, I found myself in a discussion with one of my friends. We were having a great conversation as he's genuinely interested in the details, and has plenty of his own to offer. Suddenly, he started to act a little bit nervous - he looked down, shuffled his feet a little and his hands started to fidget. He said something which I recognized as English, but couldn't recall a single word of it. I asked him to repeat. Again, I still couldn't understand him. The third time, I heard him perfectly. "I often tell people the things you say as if they were true". I immediately said "I'm sorry." "Sorry? Why are you sorry?" he asked. "I thought you were upset about something I told you that wasn't true". After he left, I pondered this and realized that I took the individual phrase "...as if they were true" literally. Indeed, he had correctly said what he was trying to say, as he didn't mean "as if" sarcastically. The next day, I learned that I still hadn't understood what he meant. He claimed that he didn't mean "you" as in "me specifically", but "you" as in "people in general".
Indeed, quite innocently, I had completely misunderstood my friend. And herein lies the deeper problem. People are like Faux pas machines, inadvertently telling you what they really think without knowing it. I believe it's quite possible that in actuality, he probably did tell somebody something that I had said, as the discussion leading to his comment was precisely about something which I had incorrectly assumed.
People do this all the time...they are meaning to tell you one thing when they actually think something else. It's likely they are just trying to protect our sensibilities while simultaneously commenting on something they just realized. They don't see honesty as the truth about what they think, only the truth of what they meant to say.
