this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
917 points (97.2% liked)

Greentext

4459 readers
357 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 217 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (109 children)

Actual autist here: Took me a loooong time to figure out a whole bunch of social concepts when it comes to what neurotypicals basically deem as small talk.

Firstly, you basically just have to accept that for most people, a level of classist, racist, other kinds of stereotypical insults are socially viewed as basically acceptable, even though its usually quite obvious they are, in fact, insults.

Then you have to understand the concept of proportionality in small talk. You have to reply with something that's very obviously and directly relevant, and of the same magnitude.

(Jumping from an insult about dietary preferences to an insult about war crimes is not the same magnitude)

Encapsulating this entire social interaction is the setting: coworkers of mixed nationality likely and an after work dinner likely implies an expectation of basically corporate social etiquette, ie, back handed compliments to establish a social dominance hierarchy, where the name of the game us getting as close to breaching the invisible 'wow what an asshole' line without actually stepping over it.

To avoid looking meek, docile, awkward or antisocial, you have to figure out an appropriate small talk style reply, which actually requires a fairly detailed knowledge of the other persons you are conversing with. Their culture, personal history, personal beliefs, etc.

If you don't do this at least semi-regularly, then you are a pushover who will be given higher workloads with no extra compensation and likely will not advance very far in your career, as you seem to be fine where you are.

So ok, if you know a bit about Israelis, you might attempt to insult back along the lines of dietary preferences.

But, its a faux pas to escalate even within this realm of responses: If you retort that you 'prefer your potatoes with pork', well, that's probably going to be viewed as quite rude, as that's still a higher magnitude, as it references something that is commonly known to be forbidden to most Israelis.

What might be a proportional response would be 'Sorry, I'd make them (the potatoes) into latkes for you, but I don't have any eggs'.

But that may still be deemed as overly offensive, depending on the temperament of the Israeli and the level to which the other coworkers feel the need to be defensive toward perceived anti-semitism.

So, as an autistic person, you have to consciously have all this knowledge and think through it all logically in real time, all while your actual emotion is anger because you don't give a fuck that the potato comment was supposed to be a joke, because it was in actuality a racist insult that actually references a fucking famine and a dietary stereotype that exists largely due to imperialist exploitation of your ancestors.

In summary, yeah small talk is an absolute nightmare for autistic people who are in an aggressive, hostile social environment, which, at least in my experience, is almost all of them.

[–] superkret@feddit.org 165 points 2 months ago (28 children)

(Jumping from an insult about dietary preferences to an insult about war crimes is not the same magnitude)

The potato joke is also a joke about a genocide, though.

Like "How many potatoes does it take to kill an Irishman?"
"None"

[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

This is true, (see my second to last paragraph) but ... that is not as widely known.

Most people just think 'Idk, Irish people like potatoes'.

Most people think it is just in the realm of dietary preferences and cuisine and don't know why.

Even though there is a fairly direct equivalence if you actually know the history of the stereotype, most people don't.

Thus you are perceived as overreacting if you jump right to genocide.

To attempt an analogy:

It's like if a boomer tells a millennial or gen z to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and they point out that the original meaning of that phrase was meant to encapsulate the literal physical impossibility of doing so as analogous to making a decent living for yourself in an economy where very very few people have the means/opportunity/connections/dumb luck to earn more than basically a subsistence wage.

The boomer just gets offended or bewildered because they didn't know that, or they don't believe it, and they're too arrogant to admit they have no real, useful advice, and that all they have to offer is infantilization.

Their ignorance (and inability to admit their knowledge is flawed) allows them to keep using an offensive phrase and not see this as offensive.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 10 points 2 months ago

Most people think it is just in the realm of dietary preferences and cuisine and don’t know why.

And yet, if you said something about black people and watermelon or fried chicken, or Chinese people and cats, you would immediately be treated like a racist, because you would be.

load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments (106 replies)