Attracted to confrontation?
I'm pretty good at handling conflict directly and assertively, not aggressively. But, if someone is mad at me and I know it, I will avoid them.
AS BF is different. If he has a grudge against someone, he will NOT speak out, but avoid the person indefinitely. But, if someone is screwing with him, he will have it out with them and do as good a job as a rabid lawyer.
_________________
I am a very strange female.
http://www.youtube.com/user/whitetigerdream
Don't take life so seriously. It isn't permanent!
i am not attracted to confrontation. confrontation is a problem for me to deal with.
i have as well as AS, ODD; and i feel the urge to annoy people in mild ways. not ways that should upset them, but just in ways where i can see an exasperatedly confused expression on their faces.
some people think i solicit the confrontations i experience through my "trying to pester" mentality.
i like to say things that surprise people and make them think i am stupid. i like to look at their faces when they think i am stupid. it is a funny expression to me.
some people who find out i am not as stupid as they thought, may get angry with me, but i will not challenge them because they are probably correct in thinking i manipulated their thinking for a while, and i agree it is wrong to treat people as toys (although no one ever designed a toy which is more fun).
but i am submissive in those circumstances and try to tell them that i do not regard them any differently than a bar of soap, so they should relax. they eventually forget it i suppose.
i have a gap in my ODD where i do not have any input/output. that is in the normal circumstances like a boss getting cranky that i brought the wrong discs to a conference. i am normally apologetically reactive to that, and i fix the matter promptly with much effort if needed.
on the serious side of my ODD, if a bossy person feels full of himself and brags and tries to take authoritative control of the situation at hand, then i look for how to bring him down. it is an instinctive urge and i wish i did not have it.
i behave in a way that is not considered normal toward authoritative people.
eg:
i like to walk in a straight line to where i am going, and if a bossy alpha male is in my way (which i make sure he is) i ask him to move. he may say i can walk around him, but i will say "i have already plotted my course and you are an obstacle". then he may become irate, and i will coldly tell him to shift from my intended course so i can pass without bothersome modifications.
i know that language is kind of dramatic, but i like to adopt certain persona's in relating to certain people, and i will not stop snipping away at the integrity of a falsely authorized alpha male, and i like to tempt them to make fools of themselves by becoming emotional and making stupid mistakes like blowing their little whistle sized stacks.
i guess i am unrefined in my rebuttal of anyone who tries to enforce a modification upon how intend to proceed.
the more vested with undeserved authority a person is, the more my basic instincts boil me up a response that i can not control.
Not because you are allergic to fascism, but because you are punishing the wrong people, or punishing the right people, buy not telling them why. Be a man. Tell the truth. You'll get fired either way, but at least it'll be for something.
you are not qualified to "call" it anything.
are you talking about yourself or are you doing a parody of me? if you are doing a parody, it would be better for your whole post to be expressed inside quotation marks.
i really have no idea whether you are telling me your true story, or whether you are satirising what i said.
you wasted some calories there i think.
you are trying to rationalize what is instinctive to me and you are unable to do so. there is no hostility in my mind when i take a person for a cognitive ride. it is just that the perception i have of people is dim, and i prefer to play with them idly, as there is nothing else i can do with them.
i play with soap. i like to sculpt soft soap into figures i desire with my fingernails.
i would not work for you anyway. what i meant by the "bar of soap" thing, was that i did not have any special interest in the person that i made angry.
have you heard the term "i don't know you from a bar of soap". so it was supposed to diffuse his testicular anger at my temperament.
now i am off to beddy byes and you need not respond. i got your "drift".
It wouldn’t be a problem if other people didn’t make it a problem.
Formal structures make sense to me. Let’s say that we have a group (a tribe, a company, a school) and we have a job to do that we all agree is important. We have a division of labor and a hierarchy that makes sense. The boss is a benevolent dictator who is taking everyone’s best interests into consideration. He delegates chores and coordinates our efforts, for the benefit of the whole group. That works for me. I’m a great support person and don’t need to be the boss.
It starts to fall apart when they try to pretend that butt kissing and tolerating various forms of abuse are part of the job description. Nope, I didn’t sign up for that. The formal job description might mention pushing a broom or pulling weeds from the garden… no mention of butt kissing. If I happen to miss a weed, the correct response would be to point it out and allow me to correct the error. Smacking me in the head is about the boss’ own unresolved issues, and has nothing to do with me or the weed. It is an abuse of power. It would not make me smarter or more efficient. It only makes me angry and less motivated. It is counter-productive.
Ok, hold that thought for a minute. I’m going to re-run my post from the thread, “Questions on ABA” (Applied Behavior Analysis) http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt94082.html
ABA starts with a handful of erroneous assumptions, including the one that says you need to crawl before you can walk. They see that, statistically, most people learn X before they learn Y before they learn Z, and assume that everyone must go through the same developmental sequence.
We do not need to do that.
Most people are born knowing X, can learn Y, and very few ever get to Z.
I was born knowing Z, can learn Y, and refuse to internalize X.
Z = Logic. Truth. Rational thinking. Honesty. The answer to everything.
X = Herd instinct. The root of all evil. The cause of all of society’s ills. A dishonesty so profound that you can’t even call it a lie.
Y = Figuring out how to share the planet with other life forms.
ABA insists that a child progress through X and Y, at the expense of Z. All that can do is break the child’s mind. It just sends his head spinning in a thousand directions. Passive-aggressive behavior is one of many possible outcomes. The rebel without a cause. Various pathological behaviors. If he manages to survive at all, it will be in spite of ABA and not because of it.
If you are responsible for the care of a small child with Asperger’s, but you don’t get it, don’t even try. All you can do is harm. Just feed him and keep him out of the street until he’s at least eight years old. Then, at the intellectual level, you can start working on strategies that would fall into the “Y” category. As an adult, he might have an interest in figuring out “X,” which would include studying human nature as a system: psychology, anthropology, sociology and such. S/he will never learn it at the reflexive, instinctive level, any more than the NT can learn honesty at the reflexive, instinctive level.
We are not a disease. We are the cure.
ABA is an attempt to push buttons that are not there. Social pressure -- "Oh, pretty please, do it for me," or fascism -- "Because I said so," fall on deaf ears. They made no sense to me when I was a kid, because I don't have those buttons. While I understand them now, at an intellectual level, I still find them to be offensive.
When a NT parent or teacher tries pushing those buttons and gets no response, he naturally becomes frustrated, infuriated, enraged, abusive. There's no other way for it to go.
As though their instinctive bullying weren't enough, ABA advocates systematic, institutionalized bullying, from an "authority" figure who pretends to know what he's doing.
====================
MALCOLM X: Who Taught You To Hate Yourself? (Have I worn this one out yet?) http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt77445.html
If left alone, that instinctive honesty would be one factor in the makings of a saint. Or a Ghandi. Or an Einstein.
If you mess with that instinct, you will not transform the person into an NT. If you are completely successful with the ABA approach, you will only make him so thoroughly confused that he is unfit for any roll in society.
Edmund Burke said that “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." ABA would much prefer that we shut up and do nothing.
I think I tend to have a rather confrontational personality. I think it is because I lay myself so open to the negativities and hypocricies in life and I feel duty-bound tro expose them. Howevere there seems to be a fair few people in this world who feel duty bound to protect the status quo.
Rather troublesome, since I am a man on a miossion to open people's eyes.
_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph
gina-ghettoprincess
Veteran
Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,669
Location: The Town That Time Forgot (UK)
I am very argumentative and confrontational by nature. My mum says I could have an argument in an empty room (which is stupid because if the room was empty I wouldn't be in there to have an argument, but hey).
If someone pisses me off, I always start an argument with them because it is satisfying to tell them exactly what I think of them.
_________________
'El reloj, no avanza
y yo quiero ir a verte,
La clase, no acaba
y es como un semestre"
Concenik
Velociraptor
Joined: 27 Mar 2009
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 441
Location: not in average tinfoil fanlnand teeth optional
It wouldn’t be a problem if other people didn’t make it a problem.
Formal structures make sense to me. Let’s say that we have a group (a tribe, a company, a school) and we have a job to do that we all agree is important. We have a division of labor and a hierarchy that makes sense. The boss is a benevolent dictator who is taking everyone’s best interests into consideration. He delegates chores and coordinates our efforts, for the benefit of the whole group. That works for me. I’m a great support person and don’t need to be the boss.
It starts to fall apart when they try to pretend that butt kissing and tolerating various forms of abuse are part of the job description. Nope, I didn’t sign up for that. The formal job description might mention pushing a broom or pulling weeds from the garden… no mention of butt kissing. If I happen to miss a weed, the correct response would be to point it out and allow me to correct the error. Smacking me in the head is about the boss’ own unresolved issues, and has nothing to do with me or the weed. It is an abuse of power. It would not make me smarter or more efficient. It only makes me angry and less motivated. It is counter-productive.
Ok, hold that thought for a minute. I’m going to re-run my post from the thread, “Questions on ABA” (Applied Behavior Analysis) http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt94082.html
ABA starts with a handful of erroneous assumptions, including the one that says you need to crawl before you can walk. They see that, statistically, most people learn X before they learn Y before they learn Z, and assume that everyone must go through the same developmental sequence.
We do not need to do that.
Most people are born knowing X, can learn Y, and very few ever get to Z.
I was born knowing Z, can learn Y, and refuse to internalize X.
Z = Logic. Truth. Rational thinking. Honesty. The answer to everything.
X = Herd instinct. The root of all evil. The cause of all of society’s ills. A dishonesty so profound that you can’t even call it a lie.
Y = Figuring out how to share the planet with other life forms.
ABA insists that a child progress through X and Y, at the expense of Z. All that can do is break the child’s mind. It just sends his head spinning in a thousand directions. Passive-aggressive behavior is one of many possible outcomes. The rebel without a cause. Various pathological behaviors. If he manages to survive at all, it will be in spite of ABA and not because of it.
If you are responsible for the care of a small child with Asperger’s, but you don’t get it, don’t even try. All you can do is harm. Just feed him and keep him out of the street until he’s at least eight years old. Then, at the intellectual level, you can start working on strategies that would fall into the “Y” category. As an adult, he might have an interest in figuring out “X,” which would include studying human nature as a system: psychology, anthropology, sociology and such. S/he will never learn it at the reflexive, instinctive level, any more than the NT can learn honesty at the reflexive, instinctive level.
We are not a disease. We are the cure.
ABA is an attempt to push buttons that are not there. Social pressure -- "Oh, pretty please, do it for me," or fascism -- "Because I said so," fall on deaf ears. They made no sense to me when I was a kid, because I don't have those buttons. While I understand them now, at an intellectual level, I still find them to be offensive.
When a NT parent or teacher tries pushing those buttons and gets no response, he naturally becomes frustrated, infuriated, enraged, abusive. There's no other way for it to go.
As though their instinctive bullying weren't enough, ABA advocates systematic, institutionalized bullying, from an "authority" figure who pretends to know what he's doing.
====================
MALCOLM X: Who Taught You To Hate Yourself? (Have I worn this one out yet?) http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt77445.html
If left alone, that instinctive honesty would be one factor in the makings of a saint. Or a Ghandi. Or an Einstein.
If you mess with that instinct, you will not transform the person into an NT. If you are completely successful with the ABA approach, you will only make him so thoroughly confused that he is unfit for any roll in society.
Edmund Burke said that “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." ABA would much prefer that we shut up and do nothing.
That was a really great post. Thanks for the read.