Is discussing what it is like to be Autistic with Neurotypical people an exercise in futility?

I wasn't diagnosed until early last year at age 55, after a lifetime of being labelled as difficult, argumentative, eccentric, weird etc etc. I used to think that I was neurotypical & it's only since my diagnosis that I have been increasingly aware of the differerence.

The question cuts both ways though, since I have no idea what it is like to be neurotypical. Fundamentally, it is impossible to know what it is like to be someone else & we can only imagine what it is like inside someone else's head based on both their descriptions & observed behaviour.

I think the problem that many neurotypicals have with understanding people on the spectrum is that they start from the position that it is a disability rather than just an alternate mode of being. If an NT automatically assumes that people on the spectrum are broken in some way, they are unlikely to properly listen to any description & will only remember the negative things which confirm their pre-existing prejudices.

I am frequently frustrated by the irrational/childish behaviour of some NTs & how they often seem to take far too long to understand things that seem overwhelmingly obvious. They rarely seem to feel the need to explain themselves for being that way though.

Pirate Santa said:

The question cuts both ways though, since I have no idea what it is like to be neurotypical. Fundamentally, it is impossible to know what it is like to be someone else & we can only imagine what it is like inside someone else's head based on both their descriptions & observed behaviour.

This is true.  But neurotypicality is regarded as the 'norm' by virtue of the fact that the vast majority of people are neurotypicals.  Which is why we copy them in order to get by out there in the world.  They have each other, too, to back up their sense that they're right and we're not.  We're the odd ones.  We're the single cat in the room full of dogs.  We don't have to understand why they behave the way they do in order to copy them.  They, on the other hand, would never try to copy us.  If they did, they'd make a much bigger hash of it than we make copying them.

I agree with you, the point I was trying to make was mostly in answer to the original question. Unless the NT was particularly open-minded, in my opinion it really would be a futile exercise because most of the time they would just be looking for yet more ways to confirm their own prejudices.

How many times have you been in a controversial discussion with someone where they attempt to repeat back something you just said, but their version has somehow become horribly distorted by pre-existing prejudices & opinions? This has happened to me a lot & it never ceases to amaze me. I might have a terrible memory for people's names, but I have always had a very accurate literal memory for the exact words used in an argument, especially in meetings at work where I rarely took notes, but could always remember exactly what was said for a long time afterwards.

Quite often people don't listen to your actual words, because they only hear whatever confirms previously held opinions. I honestly think that most people don't even want to understand the viewpoints of others because just it takes too much effort on their part.

Probably the reason why I am uncomfortable with the concept of the original question is that depending on the context it might end up being more of an apology than an explanation, especially in a work environment. A discussion with good friends in a pub though would probably be fine

I agree with you, the point I was trying to make was mostly in answer to the original question. Unless the NT was particularly open-minded, in my opinion it really would be a futile exercise because most of the time they would just be looking for yet more ways to confirm their own prejudices.

How many times have you been in a controversial discussion with someone where they attempt to repeat back something you just said, but their version has somehow become horribly distorted by pre-existing prejudices & opinions? This has happened to me a lot & it never ceases to amaze me. I might have a terrible memory for people's names, but I have always had a very accurate literal memory for the exact words used in an argument, especially in meetings at work where I rarely took notes, but could always remember exactly what was said for a long time afterwards.

Quite often people don't listen to your actual words, because they only hear whatever confirms previously held opinions. I honestly think that most people don't even want to understand the viewpoints of others because just it takes too much effort on their part.

Probably the reason why I am uncomfortable with the concept of the original question is that depending on the context it might end up being more of an apology than an explanation, especially in a work environment. A discussion with good friends in a pub though would probably be fine