Published on 12, July, 2020
The years I’ve been accused of a lot of things a lot of different times. Mostly in relation to things driven by aspects of my autism that people took objection to. Looking back and reflecting I started to notice that the way I’ve dealt with these situations has changed over the years.
My first reaction to an accusation used to be to give some one what I call a bruised toe apology. as if you were apologising to someone who’s toes you’d had just stepped on. It’s not really intended as an admission of culpability. You didn’t mean for it to happen and you couldn’t possibly have foreseen it happening and wasn’t as if you were unusually careless. It’s more an expression of regret your actions inadvertently caused somebody else pain.
But I have discovered that as the years have gone on and I’ve been attacked more and more and accused more and more I’ve stopped giving these apologies. Too often they are interpreted as some sort of admission of guilt and people will turn around and say well he admits it therefore we’ve every reason to punish him and blame him and censure him and kick him out.
There are some people who just don’t want to be reasonable and who will never be satisfied with an apology or an explanation. They’re too many people out there who will judge you guilty as soon as the accusation is made and will admit no latitude for any consideration on your behalf.
It’s been my experience that if you make an apology these individuals will jump on it and use it as grounds to try and convince everybody else that you are guilty as charged; must be excommunicated as soon as possible. Conversely if you make no apology they will accuse you of being completely uncontright, incorrigible and therefore completely unworthy of any consideration. You can’t win with these people, but if instead of apologising you start by attacking the substance of the accusations as soon as possible and as directly as possible you at least have a chance to stop them shutting down the debate before it starts.
If your defence is that your autism occasionally causes you to come off as a bit of an arsehole adopting an argumentative approach that makes you seem needlessly belligerent is not actually that harmful to your case. Afterwards after you’ve made all your arguments, inserted all the caveats, then you can make your apology. just make sure that no one could mistake it for an admission of culpability.
The important thing is to get your foot in the door in the argument so those open to the possibility of autism as an excuse can actually get to hear your side of the story
So I’m really curious to hear how you deal with being accused? Have you noticed the way you handle it has changed over time?
Peter said:Self reflection is important and highly beneficial. But did it ever occur to you to reflect upon your accusers and why they might be motivated to accuse you?
You and I have disagreed more than once I think with regard to our perceptions of women, in particular in the context of autism.
What I haven't seen you do (at least not often, I don't read every thread) is to acknowledge what others say and then incorporate the views of others into your own.
At least, you could give others the benefit of the doubt.
I don't know you in 'real life' and in your interactions with people, I just see what I read here.
I just wondered whether some of what you are experiencing is related to being rather intractable in your views.
The ability to change and to question ourselves is important in our relations with others.
It's fair to say I hold most views strongly. At least any I'd care to spend time talking about at length online. I can be persuaded. But generally only by argument not emotion. People will say to me variations of, 'you should agree with me because I've had X, Y, Z life experience,' and my response will be, 'the plural of anecdote is not data.'
To change my mind you have to get into the nuts of bolts of an argument analysing little details and how they fit together from the bottom up. To me esoteric but carefully constructed thought experiments are often more persuasive than nebulous personal experience. I tend to take a reductionist approach to things. Often (but not always) Quantitive too. I don't think a 'big picture' thinker could persuade me of anything. You have to tear into the details to persuade me.
Peter said:People will say to me variations of, 'you should agree with me because I've had X, Y, Z life experience,' and my response will be, 'the plural of anecdote is not data.'
Well, I can see where the issues you discuss in your opening of this thread may arise then.
We had a discussion on a thread where a woman was looking for relationships + you said something to the effect of dressing a certain way + being attractive + men will just appear (like magnetism - my words).
The initial attraction, the 'magnetism' may work, but then getting beyond that point into an actual relationship, is entirely different. Even a conversation can be very hard!
However, I said that (re your above comment) that wasn't my experience even though I was attractive and that autism affects a woman in every way in respect of relations with people, often 'negatively'.
If you think that any data that may be available on this is more important than the 'life experience' of the subject of the conversation, you will indeed come into conflict with people.
Well I don't 100% remember the context of the conversation. But I'm sure there are some autistic women who are as open to casual sex as the average man. The point is I wouldn't assume sex = relationship. Certainly not if we were discussing what a hypothetical persons options might be.
Peter said:But I wouldn't nessicerally assume that 'men appearing' would need to lead to a relationship. Many women might be quite interested in casual sex.
We were and are talking about autistic women so the above is irrelevant.
Autistic women struggle to enter and maintain relationships and appearances won't change that.
I wonder what your data would show with regard to how many autistic women are interested in casual sex!
This response just reaffirms how I feel about where the issues you spoke of in your original post may be originating from.
I vaguely remember that exchange. But I wouldn't nessicerally assume that 'men appearing' would need to lead to a relationship. Many women might be quite interested in casual sex. It's also sometimes posible to convert attraction to friendship. I've known women with a fair number of male friends who first got to know them because they 'fancied' them.
You know I once got shouted at by this irrational woman in a car park. I was at the bottom of a long narrow ramp at the carpark exit barrier. And I couldn't seem to find my ticket in the glove box. After maybe 2 minuets of searching the women in the car behind me gets out and starts to have a go at me demanding I back all the way up this narrow long ramp so she can drive around me. And I respond with what you'd expect. 'I'm sorry I'm 100% certain the ticket is in here just give me a moment etc.' But she starts getting hysterical. She'll be late picking her son up from school, which means he might be abducted and killed. The absurdity of it, as if being 5 minuets late is going to do anything other than annoy the teachers who want to go home. And I wonder to my self is this women just trying to make a scene or does she really seriously believe this. And sadly for her I think she did.
I think she was so paranoid and irrational that she really believed her lateness would some how endanger her son. This is why I don't easily trust personal experience. It's filtered through personal feelings. People are ruled by their amygdalas more than their cortex when it comes to assessing risk or effectiveness of given strategies or attributing cause to effect. If some one wants me to take their personal experience seriously in an argument they need to show me they can deconstruct those experiences analytically and dispassionately, with out exploding every-time their interpretation of their experience is questioned.