If I Hear That One More Time

Post Reply New Topic

If I hear the charcteristic of poor eye contact listed in relation to murderers and criminals such as the Professor that killed and wounded others on campus I'm going to loose it myself. It is hard enough to deal with the discrimination and attitudes of those around me without having to hear that it is possibly a criminal and sick behavior.

NTs joke about wishing something would happen to their mthlw or boss ect, but unless it is deemed problematic that is ok. So once again I feel those with this symptom are victim to the double standard placed on us by NTs.

I dunno maybe no one else feels this way and I'm just venting some frustration today.

I don't know why they would associate lack of eye contact with murderers. It just shows that some people are ignorant and very misinformed.

I wonder if this is their way of telling us "Start working on your eye contact or you could be mistaken for a criminal?"

Yeah, I agree. Sociopaths use eye contact like they use any other non-verbal behavior--however it will get them an advantage.

I know that not making eye contact can be seen as deceptive, but that's not even the case with many liars, who tend to make too much eye contact.

The general conception of people who don't make eye contact, though, seems to be that they are shy or preoccupied, which is a fairly neutral thing for people to think.

It's often possible to fake it without getting too distracted by looking past other peoples' heads.

I didn't like that either. I agree with Callista. Look at Scott Peterson on TV, looking the interviewer right in the eye and lying through his teeth.

People make a lot of assumptions after the fact. You really never know what is going on inside peoples heads. Look at the quiet, nice people who freak out. You really just don't know.

because people are stoooooopid.

like there is a saying, something like 'never make the mistake of confusing beauty with virtue', yet we do it all the time.

people want to think, 'good social skills=good person' and 'bad social skills=bad person'. because it's simple, and so narcissistic, to operate from the standpoint of 'what is pleasing to me is good'. I mean, that is like a three year old mentality. And comforting to some people so they don't want to be confronted with just how wrong they are. It's getting better than it used to be though...thanks to the public knowing about sociopathy and stuff.

In non Autistics/Aspies, a lack of eye contact can potentially be a strong indicator of dishonesty(which is obviously associated with criminals)...at least according to some "experts".

Most people being accused of a crime are going to say "I didn't do it" when they do get caught, even though they are likely 100% guilty. Most criminals are well known for claiming innocence and otherwise lying about what they've done. I've read about a lack of consistent eye contact a few times as being associated as an indicator of lying in NT's, among other things. Why that one little detail seems to be so important to people, I don't know. It's really quite ignorant to use that one detail to determine if someone is prone to criminal behavior or not. Obviously, there are many things that can point to someone being a liar or a criminal besides poor eye contact. People are unfortunately very judgmental and don't even bother to assess *why* they are even judging someone for something like this, most people simply just don't think.

I think that's part of where this assumption may be coming from.

I'm not saying that it's okay for people to be judging someone just based on how much eye contact they make, because a lack of eye contact can point to so many different things. But, the association of poor eye contact with dishonesty is widely publicized; whereas not making eye contact being a trait of Autism/Asperger's, is not as well known.

I know what you mean. Our department head cornered my faculty mentor this past week to discuss "someone with potentially psychotic behaviors." My mentor only has three students who he sees regularly, and the other two are both outgoing and personable, so who could he possibly mean, I wonder? He mentioned it over lunch with several other students and me present (he treated it like a joke, as if he thought the department chair was being ridiculous), so part of me says it couldn't have been me they were discussing, but I'm paranoid, now.

I'm going to talk to my therapist tomorrow. He offered to write a letter to my workplace once before describing where I have issues, so maybe he'll be willing to do so now for the university. It's better, I think, to nip this sort of thing in the bud, but I really didn't want to have to bring my own issues into the picture here, since I don't have the kind of impairment that requires accomodation. I just come off as being a bit eccentric and quirky. It's annoying when people panic over silly things.

So what do innocents say then when they are accused of a crime? I didn't know there was criminal talk.

So I can just see now how innocent people can make themselves look guilty by saying those four words. Sometimes using patterns in peoples behavior doesn't help.

WhoaWhoaWhoa - Hoooold on there, Baba Looey. I understand what you mean, but saying "I didn't do it" when accused of a crime doesn't mean you're likely guilty - who wouldn't say that, especially if they actually didn't do it? I mean, if saying "I didn't do it" makes you suspicious, what are you supposed to say when you're innocent?

Of course a lot of guilty people are going to lie when confronted with their misdeeds, especially when that's going to automatically deprive them of their liberty, but if you paint everyone with that same broad brush, you're assuming that anyone who's ever accused is automatically guilty, that the authorities never make a mistake (or wrongfully persecute for their own political purposes). That's why, in theory at least, we're supposed to be living in a society in which everyone accused is 'presumed innocent' until proven guilty. Although I'm not naive enough to believe that's actually the way it works out, since I think most juries are comprised of citizens with that same prejudicial attitude - that you wouldn't have been arrested if you weren't already guilty.

Oh yeah, eye contact. Funny, lack of same is generally associated by 'common knowledge' ie, folk wisdom, with lying, probably because as any parent knows, when you confront a child with something naughty they've done and they deny it, they can't look you in the eye. Grownups are a whole different story, because they know this already and easily learn to compensate for it. The best liars I've run across in my life (and unfortunately, there have been far too many), all look straight at you when they lie, without so much as a flinch.

I have seen some things mentioned in recent years on some of the crime dramas that sounds interesting - to the effect that when people during conversation look up and right, they're recalling, and when they look down and left, they're fictionalizing, or something like that - I may have it backwards or all screwed up, but it was interesting at the time... In any case, its something I don't think most people would be conscious of, therefore less likely to fake.

I've heard that, too, and it is to the left, but it isn't always true. I tend to look mostly to the left when answering questions. It usually means I've been asked a question for which I need to organize my thoughts in order to get the point across clearly. I'm not lying, just composing my answer.

Who's left? I've always wondered. The person speaking or the person observing.?

You know, I'm not sure. I always assumed it meant the speaker's left.

It's because people can be very stupid about the whole eye-contact thing.

Probably so, but if I was the one observing I would have to think twice. My brain has trouble quickly transferring that kind of information. I embarrassed myself at a water aerobics class because I couldn't transfer the teachers right to my left and got all tangled up. That's probably why I fell down in jazzercise too. But on to topic...I'm very much better but still can't maintain steady eye contact. I think most people assume it's reticence at a first meeting. Avoiding eye contact with the intent of deception is situational. Chances are people are going to compare the person they know ordinarily to the same person who is avoiding eye contact after being questioned.

it's like the inevitabe post-murder spree comment, "he seemed like a nice guy...kind of quiet, but nice..." UH OH. there it is! Quiet=Evil. jesus.

so basically, be really loud and stare people down, and you'll get away with anything.