Large groups of (strange) people

Larger groups have more sub-groups. This is especially so if these sub-groups previously existed and continue to exist while only partly merging into the larger group - does that make sense?

The sub-groups will have their own sets of collective understandings - words and phrases they only use with each other, agreements about what to say and not to say about members of their group or relationships in the group, shared humour, including shared history of humour. A sub group might accept a joke at another's expense, but not if it came from someone in another sub-group.

What NTs have to do when groups merge into larger groups is "play by ear", work out what degree of informality one sub-group will allow an outsider, or someone from another sub-group. The sub groups will continue to exist on their own account, while sharing some aspects of socialisation with the whole group.

One could offer the analogy of two groups (extended families) of monkeys coming together to work jointly to secure food resources. The top monkeys will try to enforce themselves on the newcomer group as well as their own, and try to eliminate competition. There will be some changes and mergings, but the sub-groups will retain some of their original identity. Maybe I'm just making it worse, but thinking of monkeys, anthropologically, often explains humans.

Back to the human population. What happens to the person with aspergers? Well they don't usually understand the codes of their own sub-group, but their sub-group may be making allowances.

The newly arrived sub-groups will not understand the person with aspergers, and will wonder why the sub-group with the aspie is making allowances for someone who isn't adjusting to the new situation well.

At the same time the sub-groups are merging into a larger group, and sharing some socialisation and social codes. Therefore the other members of the aspie's sub-group are having to make compromises to fit in with the larger group.

The trouble is, for the aspie, all this relationship re-assignment will be meaningless. They want things to stay the same in their sub group, and for the new arrivals to be equally accommodating.

AS people can learn to look for and read the "social codes" but it is a slower process, and when the dynamics are changing and realigning within a larger group, that's really hard for the aspie.

To refer that back to you, the dynamics of a larger social group involve re-adjustments. You wont be able to make the adjustments as quickly and you are likely to feel left out - until perhaps the larger group comes round to accepting and accommodating your difference.

I hope that makes sense - I've had a bit of trouble seeing through my own argument - so it may not be as clear as I had hoped.

I do envy you going into pubs and chatting to a few friends without being affected by the background. Where there is complex sound and movement I rapidly lose coherence of what I hear and even what I say. I just have to nod most of the time and guess the way the conversation is going because most of it becomes unintelligible. I can improve things by sitting or standing by a wall, so the conflicting sounds only come from one direction, but that means moving to the edge of a gathering, which is seen as anti-social, and not many "friends" will play along as it takes them out of the core action.

Larger groups have more sub-groups. This is especially so if these sub-groups previously existed and continue to exist while only partly merging into the larger group - does that make sense?

The sub-groups will have their own sets of collective understandings - words and phrases they only use with each other, agreements about what to say and not to say about members of their group or relationships in the group, shared humour, including shared history of humour. A sub group might accept a joke at another's expense, but not if it came from someone in another sub-group.

What NTs have to do when groups merge into larger groups is "play by ear", work out what degree of informality one sub-group will allow an outsider, or someone from another sub-group. The sub groups will continue to exist on their own account, while sharing some aspects of socialisation with the whole group.

One could offer the analogy of two groups (extended families) of monkeys coming together to work jointly to secure food resources. The top monkeys will try to enforce themselves on the newcomer group as well as their own, and try to eliminate competition. There will be some changes and mergings, but the sub-groups will retain some of their original identity. Maybe I'm just making it worse, but thinking of monkeys, anthropologically, often explains humans.

Back to the human population. What happens to the person with aspergers? Well they don't usually understand the codes of their own sub-group, but their sub-group may be making allowances.

The newly arrived sub-groups will not understand the person with aspergers, and will wonder why the sub-group with the aspie is making allowances for someone who isn't adjusting to the new situation well.

At the same time the sub-groups are merging into a larger group, and sharing some socialisation and social codes. Therefore the other members of the aspie's sub-group are having to make compromises to fit in with the larger group.

The trouble is, for the aspie, all this relationship re-assignment will be meaningless. They want things to stay the same in their sub group, and for the new arrivals to be equally accommodating.

AS people can learn to look for and read the "social codes" but it is a slower process, and when the dynamics are changing and realigning within a larger group, that's really hard for the aspie.

To refer that back to you, the dynamics of a larger social group involve re-adjustments. You wont be able to make the adjustments as quickly and you are likely to feel left out - until perhaps the larger group comes round to accepting and accommodating your difference.

I hope that makes sense - I've had a bit of trouble seeing through my own argument - so it may not be as clear as I had hoped.

I do envy you going into pubs and chatting to a few friends without being affected by the background. Where there is complex sound and movement I rapidly lose coherence of what I hear and even what I say. I just have to nod most of the time and guess the way the conversation is going because most of it becomes unintelligible. I can improve things by sitting or standing by a wall, so the conflicting sounds only come from one direction, but that means moving to the edge of a gathering, which is seen as anti-social, and not many "friends" will play along as it takes them out of the core action.