Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #894533

Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Followups directed to: poster

Show key headers only | View raw

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> writes:

> On 11/11/25 9:44 PM, Nathan Smith wrote:
>
>> People on the spectrum being too rigid? 
>
> Absolutely. They tend to be binary -- yes or no, right or
> wrong, *This* means *That*. Very little nuance and by very
> little I mean none at all. Sarcasm is lost on them, because
> you're stating [A] but meaning [B] and [B] always means
> [B].
>
> Why this is so horrible is that they know this. You can
> sit down someone on the spectrum and spell it all out to
> them, and they can absorb every word then turn around and
> never so much as doubt their over rigid, black & white
> world because it "Feels" right.
>
> THAT is what makes it annoying!
>
> Someone doesn't "Get" sarcasm? Who cares. But even if you
> explain the sarcasm to them they'll reject it because that's
> not what it means!

I am in no way a professional but maybe you are on the spectrum. Ever
thought about getting your head checked out? What you are describing is
pretty close to how you act. Pointing it out and denying also engaging
in it is common among people on the spectrum who are completely
unaware. It is hard to get thrown through bullshit and not become a
asshole. On the bright side still better than being a dumbass
neurotypical who will make someones life hell for not giving the correct
amount of eye contact. The correct amount is not documented anywhere and
asking is rude and doesn't get answers yet we are somehow excepted to
know? If being rigid is the alternative to whatever the fuck is up with
neurotypicals so be it.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> - 2025-11-10 13:11 -0500
  Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> - 2025-11-10 15:46 -0600
    Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> - 2025-11-10 18:01 -0500
      Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> - 2025-11-11 12:45 -0600
        Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> - 2025-11-11 14:35 -0500
          Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> - 2025-11-11 18:29 -0600
            Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-11-11 20:40 -0700
            Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Vincent Maycock <ma.ycock@gm.ail.com> - 2025-11-11 20:55 -0800
              Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> - 2025-11-11 23:35 -0600
            Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> - 2025-11-12 00:44 -0500
              Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get "Henderson" <henderson@e.mail> - 2025-11-12 14:05 +0000
          Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Nathan Smith <nathansmith@posteo.com> - 2025-11-11 19:44 -0700
            Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> - 2025-11-12 00:35 -0500
              Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get Nathan Smith <nathansmith@posteo.com> - 2025-11-12 01:42 -0700
                Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> - 2025-11-12 11:27 -0500
              Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get "Henderson" <henderson@e.mail> - 2025-11-12 14:04 +0000
          Re: Another concept for Dawn Davenport to not get "Henderson" <henderson@e.mail> - 2025-11-12 16:42 +0000

csiph-web