 |
Posted by sylvia on Tuesday, November 08, 2005 (16:53:52)
Many times, today, we see the piece of the jigsaw puzzle with the image of the child, denoting the mystery of those on the autistic spectrum. This mystery is there, indeed, but the person, per se, is not the puzzle; it is just that "aura" (if I could use a term) that follows the person wherever... but the person is not able to hide from this "aura", but finds this "aura" often very difficult but intriguing, at the same time.
Within this puzzle, as if you took the large jigsaw piece, and broke it down into a separate puzzle in itself, is the mystery of why anyone finds something "objectionable". Where is the basis, I ask, for this? If I don't like a sport, such as soccer, why would anyone, anywhere, find my dislike for this sport objectionable? If I prefer to eat with my hands, as opposed to cutlery, again I find it hard to accept those who just claim that it is "common sense" to use cutlery (when, often, those same people will pick up certain foods, such as bananas with their hands). These are just two examples of this overwhelming issue of what others find "out of sorts" with statements, actions, or public appearance that they object to.
Twice, on Internet email groups, a few years ago and recently, I read a "rule" that the moderator of the group, at that time, had just put forward.
In the events that unfolded a few years ago, I found that someone had just gone against the "rules" of the group, and I sent a private email to the moderator, to explain the problem. The moderator became infuriated with my message, posted it to the other members of the group, and claimed that I was trying to take control of the group away from her. She immediately banned me from that group.
In the most recent example of this type of "objectionable" reaction, a group moderator was discussing polls and asked the members if they had any suggestions for a poll for the group. If so, he continued, they should forward the suggested topic for a poll to him by private email. Just after that, another member posted an open message suggesting a topic for a poll. I wrote back to the group, with a quote from the moderator about his request that any suggestion for a poll be sent to him by private email. The next day, the moderator came back and accused me of "flaming" him, by the "tone" of my message, stating that this tone was "satirical" and claiming that I was accusing him of "bad" administration in the handling of this group. I was in shock for quite some time as to how anyone could take an expression of respect for a "rule" and turn it into an accusation of assault and harassment.
What makes people try, in any way, to "read between the lines"? Is it education, itself, that teaches children and adolescents that they should, under no circumstances, take a passage "literally"? Is it the religious leaders, in referring to an article of faith, that tell their followers to "interpret" the wording of the article in a certain way? Is it the need for humour, itself, that tempts people to twist the meaning of words to create illusions, and therefore, laughs? Whatever the source or sources of this practice, it does create many problems for persons on the autistic spectrum who, like myself, see things more (but not always) in a literal setting--word for word, as it is written.
I hasten to add that we do not always see things "literally", as in the personal experience that I had with an English teacher who had the class study a poem of William Wordsworth. In that poem, one line read: "O, listen, for the vale profound is overflowing with the sound.."
The teacher asked us to give a written explanation of what the words "vale" and "profound" meant in the poem. Personally, I felt that Wordsworth was referring to the "voice" of the person he was listening to, and to the depth of that voice.
However, upon receiving the results of the assignment from the teacher, I read that I should have known that "vale" meant "valley" and that "profound" meant "deep". The teacher left a note for me to look up these words in a dictionary. That, as I saw it, was taking Wordsworth's writing very literally, whereas, I was taking his writing more metaphorically.
It's not just the statements that seem to be taken "out of context", by people reading between the lines, but also words, themselves.
One time, at a brunch with a few other persons on the autistic spectrum, the discussion seemed to be about certain soap operas, and how a brother and sister were relating to each other.
I wanted to get in to the conversation, so I said, "I wish that they would be more open with the issues surrounding incest."
At that moment, one of the autistics present, a graduate student at a local university, slumped over with her head just about hitting her plate.
The hostess, who knew her background, asked me why I had brought up the subject of child abuse, but I quickly denied having brought up that subject, at all. The hostess went on to say that this autistic student had been sexually abused by her father from early years, and the sheer mention of the word "incest" had triggered her horrid memories of those years.
The student got up from her chair and went to another room to lie down. After about an hour she came back, and was full of vengeance, telling me that I had to "think before you utter a sound, ever again!"
I was just as adamant, myself, at that time, in my defense, as I had no idea, whatsoever, that one word, out of tens of thousands of words, could trigger such a shocking reaction from someone else.
These experiences have left a lasting impression on me. That impression is one of fear.
I fear even expressing myself in front of others lest they take one word that I have spoken and take is as a "terrorist attack" against their frail egosystem.
I fear expressing myself to those in any form of authority who might construe my support of their authority as a veiled threat against their control of any circumstance or situation.
I fear expressing anything literally, lest others take it as being too blunt and not refined enough for the occasion.
I fear expressing myself with any analogy or metaphor, lest others take those statements (coming from a autistic spectrum person) as literal statements.
These fears are what keep my desire for social contact to a minimum. The human need for social contact is still there, but, out of these fears, it must be reduced as much as possible. In other words, the risk (of having others find anything that I express as objectionable) outweighs any benefits that might be gained by social contact.
The ratio is not absolute (in the sense of one hundred percent risk to zero percent social benefit), but more relative (in the sense of about seventy percent risk to thirty percent social benefit).
However, as long as the risk is greater than the benefit, when a chance to get involved socially, with others, presents itself, I am extremely leery and cannot "push" myself to "take the plunge", lest the risks rear themselves, as they have done in the foregoing examples.
That, in the essence of social isolation, is one of the "boulders" to social integration for persons on the autistic spectrum.
It is easy for anyone else to dismiss these fears by such statements as "water off a duck's back". These fears are so deep, sometimes, that they could be called phobias, but that is not the same as a social phobia, as it is not the fear of people, but the fear of their reactions, in finding a person's behaviour, words, or statements as objectionable. If people who felt this way could only see their reactions as they are--coming from themselves, the reverse would not be true, but there would be more balance in human interactions. To expect this of others, though, is, I will admit, asking too much, as they have just as much of a foundation in the basis for their reaction as an autistic person has in his foundation for fearing such a reaction.
This is not to say that it is simply a matter of autistics versus neuro-typical persons, at all, as autistics fear just as much of a reaction from other persons on the spectrum, as well (as shown in the one example above, about the university student). It's never a matter of "we" versus "them", but a fear of expressing oneself in the face of possible adversity.
Note: Brian Henson is our online columnist, if you have any comments or questions please add them below or use our feedback form.
|
|
Latest: 
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 7437
Members: 0
Visitors: 13
Total: 13
1: