social interaction and small talk - why don't we learn?

Because the rules are not at all simple. It is a lot to remember whilst trying to do it at the same time. Many of us have such busy inner monologues, thinking about rules and speaking at the same time is a challenge, not to mention also processing what the other person is saying and thinking of a response at the same rime. The anxiety about is also very high which makes it more challenging. Not to mention it's purpose seems completely pointless so my motivation to master it probably isn't that high if I'm honest. 

I'll throw a question back to you. Do you think autistic people should always be learning, as you put it , basic skills to fit in more with the neurotypical world? Or do you think that neurotypical people should be meeting us in the middle and learning to communicate the way we do?

Expecto_Patronum said:

Do you think autistic people should always be learning, as you put it , basic skills to fit in more with the neurotypical world? Or do you think that neurotypical people should be meeting us in the middle and learning to communicate the way we do?

I look at it from the perspective of what people here keep saying about wanting to have friends, wanting to fit in, wanting to seem "normal".

For context, about 1 in 50 people are autistic and I would estimate about half have social interaction issues (this is just a guestimate), so about 1 in 100 struggle with this.

If you want to engage with others socially but don't know how then do you as the 1 person in a group of 100 expect the other 99 to change and adapt in order to make it easier for you? This seems both unreasonable and unrealistic when you look at it from a numbers perspective.

So should 1 make a lot of effort or should 99 make a reasonable effort?

Expecto_Patronum said:

the rules are not at all simple.

They actually are pretty simple, but it is having the capacity to consider them when under the stress of a social interaction that is difficult.

I find that expectation of so many to change for our benefit an interesting issue, hence why I started the thread to hear opinions.

The rules may seem simple to you but to me they do not. They are not like a rule in maths that I can apply and there are also the subtleties of body language and language that can be taken literally to further complicate matters. Unless you can tell me exactly how long my response should be, exactly how long the interaction should be, exactly how many questions I should ask in response etc then I will have a constant monologue over the top saying you're doing it wrong, you should be making eye contact, they'll think your weird, you've not asked enough questions, you've asked too many questions. What is simple to one person can be hugely challenging to another. 

Yes I would like more of a social life but I'd like a social life that I enjoy and feel comfortable in. I can't stand small talk and it makes me feel extremely uncomfortable. I will do the polite answers but I would try to get out of the small talk as quickly as possible. If I know the person I tend to have default topics that I know I'm comfortable talking about and are somewhat of interest to them and so I will use that. This tends to get me through but can get me the autistic reputation of only ever talks about the same things.

I did say meet in the middle. I'm not expecting them to complete adapt for me and I do nothing. But I don't think I should have to mask more than I already do for everyone else's benefit either.

I think you may have misinterpreted what I'm saying. I don't think NTs should have to do it by law. I'm not going to tell NTs that I refuse to communicate their way. I was just trying to make a point that I don't think it should always be autistic people being expected to fit in with the NT expected behaviour when it makes the uncomfortable just because we're the minority.

I just think a bit of consideration goes a long way. I'd like a world where I could just say actually I find small talk a bit difficult, would you mind if we skipped that part and got straight to the point. That kind of thing. At the moment I wouldn't feel comfortable doing that, I think it would be perceived as rude.

Again I think Out of Sight has probably made my own point better than I did.

Obviously different individuals may require specific accommodations, but what I’ve been discussing at work is simply that people need to be understanding of each other. If someone tells you they need to do x (eg wear headphones) or can’t do y (eg go to the pub) just be understanding, believe them, don’t be a d*ck about it. 

That’s how we should treat everyone regardless of conditions or disabilities.

We’ve always adapted to people’s personalities and strengths and weaknesses, this is no different.

I do understand your 99 vs 1 point. That is the reality we’ve lived all our lives and, realistically, need to deal with now. But we shouldn’t have to and I do get a sense that things are starting to change.

Expecto_Patronum said:

I certainly would not be bullying anyone to do anything. But I don't think learning about the experiences of others is at all unreasonable either.

If you want to make it an equality issue and need to make NTs learn about us and implement communication considerations then you are effectively bullying them to change behaviour under threat of disability laws.

I think a paced process of informing the public and playing to their better nature is the most effective way to stop us being seen as a burdon on them to accommodate. Positive media role models, more coverage of explaining out challenges and the increased acceptance of its existance is the best way.

That is just my take on it though

A said:

I think we deserve the same consideration as those two deaf employees.

I broadly agree with this, but the nub of the matter comes in deciding what the considerations need to be.

Deaf people have a single issue. A solution is fairly straightforward as you describe.

For autists our needs are all over the place with some needing them and some not. Finding a simple to understand and implement accommodation then becomes much more of a headache for companies.

Then comes our issues of interacting - some have no problem, some can fake it and some fall to bit when trying it so how do you work out how to peg a solution and how much effort needs to go into training all the staff (and future staff) to be able to communicate.

Will it work for all autists? How about bipolar and ADHD sufferers or any of the other spectrum disorders?

It just becomes massively complex and unwieldy to design a solution that does not marginalise large groups of those you are tying to help.

If you can formulate a strategy to help all these people then I would love to see it but I'm drawing a blank on a broad enough solution to be useful.

I think the example that A has given is a much better example than ramps.

I certainly would not be bullying anyone to do anything. But I don't think learning about the experiences of others is at all unreasonable either.

Thank you, this was exactly the kind of point I was trying to make. 

This is amazing that they are included in this way and that people are trying hard to learn and be more inclusive.

But your right, I don't think autism is seen the same way as other disabilities some how. There's a much greater emphasis on us needing to learn. I'm fortunate that I have an understanding employer who tries to make adjustments for me but it hasn't always been like that.

Expecto_Patronum said:

Do you also think we shouldn't bother putting in things like accessibility ramps because most people aren't inconvenienced by the lack of accessibility

The ramps require no effort from neurotypicals so this is fine. The probem is when we need them to learn stuff to better understand us and make the effort of changing behaviour to accommodate us.

I'm also not saying we (NDs) need to change to be NT. The pointI was making is that it is unreasonable to bully NTs to have to learn and apply skills for our benefit. Persuasion is much more effective to avoid us becoming demonised which is what will happen if we force them to change.

Expecto_Patronum said:

As you say it is not a 1 size fits all solution and I don't think that solution is going to work for me. I also have ADHD, perhaps that plays apart

You do have an unfortunate combination of factors that are impacting your experience here. I lack experience of this particular combination of additional disorders so cannot offer experience of solutions.

Thank you for an invigorating discussion on this subject.

There are two deaf people in my office of several hundred people.

The company pays for sign interpreters for every meeting or event they need to participate in. We also have a company sponsored disability group who have run numerous sign language training sessions, which a very large number of people have attended. People try very hard to work with them.

Given that I work in technology, I’m confident there is a vastly larger number of ND people in my office alone.

I think we deserve the same consideration as those two deaf employees.

Do you also think we shouldn't bother putting in things like accessibility ramps because most people aren't inconvenienced by the lack of accessibility? I think all humans should do what they can to make the world a more accessible and inclusive place.

Do I think it needs to be exactly 50% no, it's give and take? But do I think it'd be particularly difficult to think hmmm this person prefers talking about this topic rather than the weather, I'll do that to help them have a better day. No I don't think that would be difficult or unreasonable at all.

I am extremely against make autistic people into neurotypicals. I don't expect other people to go to ridiculous efforts but I do think there are little things people can do that just makes it that little bit easier for the other person.

I've had a lot of therapy. It doesn't silence my inner monologue. Not even slightly. In fact if anything it greatens it. As you say it is not a 1 size fits all solution and I don't think that solution is going to work for me. I also have ADHD, perhaps that plays apart.

Expecto_Patronum said:

I did say meet in the middle.

Just to clarify, you expect in any group of 100 for 99 people to all make half the effort and the 1 (autist) to make half the effort?

99 inconvenienced for the benefit of the 1.

If it takes, say 5 hours of research / readiing / practice per person then that is 495 of ND effort to 5 hours of ND effort all for the benefit of the ND.

Put in these terms does it makes sense when I say it is probably an unreasonable ask?

Expecto_Patronum said:

Unless you can tell me exactly how long my response should be, exactly how long the interaction should be, exactly how many questions I should ask in response etc then I will have a constant monologue over the top

This is why I pointed out that finding a way to suppres that monologue is the most common way to deal with it. A good therapist is your best way to do this but effort and commitment to trying are also key.

Then you can start to realise that interactions are not defined in absolutes (ie exactly how long, exactly how many questions etc) and are much more organic then you can stop treating it like a computer program and more like icing a cake - it is a rough art form with guidelines and an adaptive approach is needed.

Your approach is inconsistent with the NT approach which is probably why is doesn't work well.

Armed with the knowledge of the guidelines (from the books on conversational skills), a silenced inner monologue that is actively sabotaging you and a willingness to let the conversation flow then you can start to feel the scales fall away and you can engage on more or less equal terms (albeit with a lack of experience but at least you are now on the same page).

Anyway, that is just my experience and what I have taken from others I helped with the issue. It isn't a one-size-fits-all solution.

But if you are serious about wanting to learn this then get a therapist with the skills to guide you.

Expecto_Patronum said:

I did say meet in the middle.

Just to clarify, you expect in any group of 100 for 99 people to all make half the effort and the 1 (autist) to make half the effort?

99 inconvenienced for the benefit of the 1.

If it takes, say 5 hours of research / readiing / practice per person then that is 495 of ND effort to 5 hours of ND effort all for the benefit of the ND.

Put in these terms does it makes sense when I say it is probably an unreasonable ask?

Expecto_Patronum said:

Unless you can tell me exactly how long my response should be, exactly how long the interaction should be, exactly how many questions I should ask in response etc then I will have a constant monologue over the top

This is why I pointed out that finding a way to suppres that monologue is the most common way to deal with it. A good therapist is your best way to do this but effort and commitment to trying are also key.

Then you can start to realise that interactions are not defined in absolutes (ie exactly how long, exactly how many questions etc) and are much more organic then you can stop treating it like a computer program and more like icing a cake - it is a rough art form with guidelines and an adaptive approach is needed.

Your approach is inconsistent with the NT approach which is probably why is doesn't work well.

Armed with the knowledge of the guidelines (from the books on conversational skills), a silenced inner monologue that is actively sabotaging you and a willingness to let the conversation flow then you can start to feel the scales fall away and you can engage on more or less equal terms (albeit with a lack of experience but at least you are now on the same page).

Anyway, that is just my experience and what I have taken from others I helped with the issue. It isn't a one-size-fits-all solution.

But if you are serious about wanting to learn this then get a therapist with the skills to guide you.

I think you may have misinterpreted what I'm saying. I don't think NTs should have to do it by law. I'm not going to tell NTs that I refuse to communicate their way. I was just trying to make a point that I don't think it should always be autistic people being expected to fit in with the NT expected behaviour when it makes the uncomfortable just because we're the minority.

I just think a bit of consideration goes a long way. I'd like a world where I could just say actually I find small talk a bit difficult, would you mind if we skipped that part and got straight to the point. That kind of thing. At the moment I wouldn't feel comfortable doing that, I think it would be perceived as rude.

Again I think Out of Sight has probably made my own point better than I did.

Obviously different individuals may require specific accommodations, but what I’ve been discussing at work is simply that people need to be understanding of each other. If someone tells you they need to do x (eg wear headphones) or can’t do y (eg go to the pub) just be understanding, believe them, don’t be a d*ck about it. 

That’s how we should treat everyone regardless of conditions or disabilities.

We’ve always adapted to people’s personalities and strengths and weaknesses, this is no different.

I do understand your 99 vs 1 point. That is the reality we’ve lived all our lives and, realistically, need to deal with now. But we shouldn’t have to and I do get a sense that things are starting to change.

Expecto_Patronum said:

I certainly would not be bullying anyone to do anything. But I don't think learning about the experiences of others is at all unreasonable either.

If you want to make it an equality issue and need to make NTs learn about us and implement communication considerations then you are effectively bullying them to change behaviour under threat of disability laws.

I think a paced process of informing the public and playing to their better nature is the most effective way to stop us being seen as a burdon on them to accommodate. Positive media role models, more coverage of explaining out challenges and the increased acceptance of its existance is the best way.

That is just my take on it though

A said:

I think we deserve the same consideration as those two deaf employees.

I broadly agree with this, but the nub of the matter comes in deciding what the considerations need to be.

Deaf people have a single issue. A solution is fairly straightforward as you describe.

For autists our needs are all over the place with some needing them and some not. Finding a simple to understand and implement accommodation then becomes much more of a headache for companies.

Then comes our issues of interacting - some have no problem, some can fake it and some fall to bit when trying it so how do you work out how to peg a solution and how much effort needs to go into training all the staff (and future staff) to be able to communicate.

Will it work for all autists? How about bipolar and ADHD sufferers or any of the other spectrum disorders?

It just becomes massively complex and unwieldy to design a solution that does not marginalise large groups of those you are tying to help.

If you can formulate a strategy to help all these people then I would love to see it but I'm drawing a blank on a broad enough solution to be useful.

I think the example that A has given is a much better example than ramps.

I certainly would not be bullying anyone to do anything. But I don't think learning about the experiences of others is at all unreasonable either.

Thank you, this was exactly the kind of point I was trying to make. 

This is amazing that they are included in this way and that people are trying hard to learn and be more inclusive.

But your right, I don't think autism is seen the same way as other disabilities some how. There's a much greater emphasis on us needing to learn. I'm fortunate that I have an understanding employer who tries to make adjustments for me but it hasn't always been like that.

Expecto_Patronum said:

Do you also think we shouldn't bother putting in things like accessibility ramps because most people aren't inconvenienced by the lack of accessibility

The ramps require no effort from neurotypicals so this is fine. The probem is when we need them to learn stuff to better understand us and make the effort of changing behaviour to accommodate us.

I'm also not saying we (NDs) need to change to be NT. The pointI was making is that it is unreasonable to bully NTs to have to learn and apply skills for our benefit. Persuasion is much more effective to avoid us becoming demonised which is what will happen if we force them to change.

Expecto_Patronum said:

As you say it is not a 1 size fits all solution and I don't think that solution is going to work for me. I also have ADHD, perhaps that plays apart

You do have an unfortunate combination of factors that are impacting your experience here. I lack experience of this particular combination of additional disorders so cannot offer experience of solutions.

Thank you for an invigorating discussion on this subject.

There are two deaf people in my office of several hundred people.

The company pays for sign interpreters for every meeting or event they need to participate in. We also have a company sponsored disability group who have run numerous sign language training sessions, which a very large number of people have attended. People try very hard to work with them.

Given that I work in technology, I’m confident there is a vastly larger number of ND people in my office alone.

I think we deserve the same consideration as those two deaf employees.

Do you also think we shouldn't bother putting in things like accessibility ramps because most people aren't inconvenienced by the lack of accessibility? I think all humans should do what they can to make the world a more accessible and inclusive place.

Do I think it needs to be exactly 50% no, it's give and take? But do I think it'd be particularly difficult to think hmmm this person prefers talking about this topic rather than the weather, I'll do that to help them have a better day. No I don't think that would be difficult or unreasonable at all.

I am extremely against make autistic people into neurotypicals. I don't expect other people to go to ridiculous efforts but I do think there are little things people can do that just makes it that little bit easier for the other person.

I've had a lot of therapy. It doesn't silence my inner monologue. Not even slightly. In fact if anything it greatens it. As you say it is not a 1 size fits all solution and I don't think that solution is going to work for me. I also have ADHD, perhaps that plays apart.