avalokitesha

The point I was trying to make is that no one considers neurodivergen people not human. They may sometimes treat us that way, but that's a different story.

Cvsting two things as opposites doesn't necessarily mean they are complete and total opposites. You can, and that is a common rhetorical device, pick only some relevant properties of something to make a point.

Humans and animals often get seen as opposing. But they all breathe, they all have vital organs, a lot of the time the same ones. Definitely not total opposites according to you. Our genome is more than 60% identical to a banana (source: https://www.pfizer.com/news/articles/how_genetically_related_are_we_to_bananas), so according to your logic, we cant even oppose human ratio to plants. Btw, chickens and humans have about the same ration of shared genome as bananas and humans.

Your interpretation is way too rigid to ever be able to use the concept of opposite, because you can always find something in common. This is why I think your answer was flawed.

By your logic, for a person to be considered "neurodivergent" they would have to be completely 100% unlike a neurotypical person in every single way, which is simply not the case.

By that reading, would neurodivergent people even be human?

Dude. Just look at the dictionary mening of the words. That's the actual meaning. If you want to say A, use words that mean A literally. Don't say A and B and expect us to know that you actually mean C.

You know exactly what you're doing because you proceed to complain about us wanting to not have poetry and metaphor.

If you think about it as a dialect the only way to learn it is like any other language that doesnt have a textbook: exposure with the native speakers.

I think the point OP was trying to make is that most likely people who know this dialect (i. E. Are used to working with your bess) have an idea of how he wants things.

In this case, the dialect would have a very small subset of speakers (only the people used to working with your boss).

I can see the logic in this argument, but I don't think such a small subset of speakers qualifies as a dialect and I think your boss is just being difficult. Also I'm pretty sure this would have been an issue for many neurotypicals too, since the info wasnt communicated properly.

I think this is more an example of power play - your boss is in power and how dare you not know? It's the same treatment we get from NTs everywhere. They are "in power" in the sense that they can expect most people to pick up on their code and don't have to change. Your boss on the other hand just doesn't care if you had a chance to understand and that's why I think he's just power trippy.

Like liquorice, the really intense one (salmiak). i don't think English has a word for it, since it was not recognized as a flavor before.

The thing is, I know the flavor but wouldn't know how to describe it to someone who doesn't. Asian (Korean and Chinese, to be precise) friends told me it tasted like medicine to them, because apparently it's a common flavor in traditional medicine for them?

Edited for typos.

I don't know you or anything about you but what you said, but holy shit. If I was in your care, I would end up more traumatized than before.

Boundaries are a thing. If people refuse to accept boundaries, as some therapist and especially nurses like very much to do, they are toxic. If someone tells you they don't want to be interrupted sometimes, respect that. Don't go all "I know what's best for you", unless yop're talking to a literal child - and even then think about whether you're just telling the child what to do because you don't think it should be doing what it wants or because it's really better for the kid.

Some people need alone time. It's called introversion. An international trip with constant blabbering sounds like a nightmare. I'm imagining they had booked a double room with no option for OP to withdraw. I would melt down in two days.

Not everyone is maladapted and blaming others. Some people have good reason for what you deem unreasonable demands. I don't know if your client are full-blown adults or have a handicap where their judgement is impaired somewhat, but I want to encourage you to stop and think whether what you're teaching them actually helps them and fits their individual needs or whether you you think you figured out a blanket approach that you try to get everyone to follow, no matter their mental needs.

Edit: I, too, have a relationship, a great circle of friends and a well-paying full-time job, if you want to claim authorities in something here. And I do set healthy boundaries like OP does. There is no one-size-fits-all.

I'm kinda frowning at the thought that you requiring time to yourself and taking care of yourself is avoiding demands. If my therapist told me that I'd rip him a new one. Thankfully he doesn't and actually encourages me to remove myself from unhealthy situations.

My social battery isn't endless. My processing ability isn't endless. I recharge both by spending time alone in my thoughts and hopefully getting into a flow state with whatever I'm doing.

I'm lucky enough that I have a job where that happens - I'm partially able to offset the social and mental cost of a job by simply working. But other than that I allow myself to not be productive.

My awesome therapist once prescribed me to get bored. Sit on the couch, stare out the window and try not to do anything. My brain needs that time to process everything happening during the day. Scrolling the web, comics, news that interest me? Also helping to process and get lost in a flow state.

Once I started allowing myself that, I fell asleep much better, because the input throughout the day gets processed througout the day and not at night. If you always keep busy, try to always be productive, the whole input waiting to be processed builds up like water behind a dam. Once you lay down, the dam breaks and you can't stop. It's not a bad habit to break. It's just a necessity for your brain to do.

If you're anything like me, the only thing you're doing "wrong" is not creating little islands of boredom and flow. If people refuse to accept that, they are the problem. They are crossing boundaries without a second thought. They may think they are helpful but they are not. To me it sounds like you are having your best interest in mind and acting on it despite this weird feeling of "but they love me, I should be grateful".

Love is about a lot of things, and respect is a big one. If boundaries are ignored, these people are acting toxic. I know this feels unhelpful, because you want human connection, but imho these people most likely took more out of you than they gave you. Maybe your friend has his own issues that make him not able to shut up, but it can't be you who pays the price. Maybe that girl thought you need someone to take care of you and who knows better than you and guide you through life, and that's why she nagged.

Long story short: no matter the intention, not everyone who cares about you will be actually helpful. Not everything is your fault. Keep doing you, identify your needs, communicate them (it sounds like you already did that, which is huge) and then enforce them.

From what you mentioned, I actually think you're doing great. Took me years of therapy to get to that point.

I always thought it was just not possible to measure the state without changing it, so we have no way of even guessing. Schrödinger's Cat is actually a terrible analogy imho, I always liked to think of it like christmas presents - you don't know what the inside looks like until you open it. It could be anything!

But then again, once we open it we know it has always been that. Maybe a chameleon in a box and we can't know what color it had at a given time, even if we open it later? :::

The easiest way is to say "this is the rules as written, deal with it, we don't do homebrew here" for me. The people I met in game spaces where not the type to reach a consensus quickly. I guess I've just been unlucky.

I envy you for having those kinds of people to play with!

You are just bringing examples where insecure people who struggle with social skills (hi, nice to meet you) would not be able to handle it.

You kinda completely blazed past my point while confirming it. Clearly for you rules light is great. I'm trying to tell you there's people who are not you and who need more rules to even dare to try.

Neiter you nor the person you're replying to is wrong, but the way I see it you're coming from different angles.

You're coming from the view of an experienced GM, while the person before you worries about people getting in the game or struggle with their social skills.

Imho, both ruleset have their place and everything depends on the group, what they want, what their personalities are and how experienced they are.

I would never run a table because I don't think I could handle it if one of the players got combative, and that danger is higher when you go rules light I would guess.