Sheila's Posts

In my Aspie Split post, I wrote, “The non-conformist cares as much about having his own feelings hurt by NTs as he does about possibly hurting the NT’s.”  When I followed that statement with, “However, the conforming aspie is too busy being concerned about offending NTs to fully know what outcome his behavior will cause,” I did not mean to imply that conforming aspies are not vulnerable to having their feelings hurt also. After all, an aspergers person is as much of a human being as a neurotypical is.

As I divided aspies into two categories, I now shall divide all of mankind into two categories. This split isn’t between neurotypicals and neuro-A-typicals. Instead, it is a spiritual one determined by faith in what a person believes to be true. To ignore this is to ignore the most important aspect that affects human behavior. The challenge with explaining this though is that most people today have gross misconceptions about who the true believers are of God’s word. This might explain some of the hatred that exists towards Christians.

Even among confessing believers of God’s word there is a two-way split as evidenced in James 2:19, “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.”

Simon, the sorcerer, (in Acts 8:9–25) is an example of how anyone by an act of his will can go through the outward motions that resemble true believers but yet remain as unsaved as those who don’t. Simon sincerely believed in miracles, was interested in signs of the supernatural, made an emotional decision to be baptized, and wanted (because of envy) the same powers he saw Philip display.  What Simon didn’t do though was to come humbly before the Lord to beg for His mercy.  He thought he could buy the Holy Spirit.  That’s not unlike those who ‘accept’ Jesus by an act of their will and then think that because they did so, they’re now saved.  It’s true one must accept Christ as Lord in order for God’s Spirit to abide in them, but what’s usually not mentioned is that there are two steps involved:

1. God first elects those who He will save (there are too many verses backing this up for me to want to include here; however, I’ll give this as an example for now: Colossians 2:23, “Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship,¹ and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.”).

2. Then God breaks their heart and spirit to make them contrite (Psalms 34:18 and 51:17—KJV). A person must first become ‘broken’ before he can really know what grace and mercy means.

The heart symbolizes the will, thoughts, and intellect of our mind. It’s the belly (or womb, matrix; place of conception/fertilization) that represents the fountain of our emotions. Feelings are the symptoms of the mind. Because it’s the mind that’s able to be deceived, emotions cannot always be trusted.

Before a person is saved by God, he cannot ‘keep’ his heart (mind) with all diligence as described in Proverbs 4:23, “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.” His emotions (that stem from the ‘belly’) remain vulnerable to being offended by others. That’s why God says in Colossians 3:2,  “Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.”

When someone lives as said in Galatians 5:24, “And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts,” no one can continue to hurt his ‘feelings’.

I mentioned in my previous post that non-conforming aspies are concerned about not getting hurt, but I didn’t clarify deeper about a split in what these feelings are. For example, it is right to feel angry when you cannot get hired for a job you’re more qualified for than someone else who gets hired because he ‘played the interview game’ correctly. It is not right to feel angry when someone may have offended you because his faith and/or politics differ from yours. It’s not right to feel offended because someone isn’t looking at you in the eyes and/or smiling how you’d like. To demand such things from someone who is merely neurologically different is selfish. To not accept that some people have prosopagnosia (facial blindness) and, therefore, might not remember (to your satisfaction) who you are, is another example of what’s not right.

Unfortunately, there is one last thing I must emphasize now that I’ve said what I have. There will be people who will be offended by some of the things I’ve written here and they will probably desire to express opposing views. There is nothing wrong with that, providing that they do so without linking my blog to theirs. When people choose to do such things, that simply reveals hatred on their end.

¹Will worship is another way of saying people do what they want to do. To be willing is choosing to go along with something. To worship is simply to devote your service (time, energy, money, assets, etc.) towards the object of your desire above all else.

There are two kinds of people with aspergers→ those who embrace their neurological difference and those who are determined to master the craft of acting neurotypical. Many people already know this, but what they don’t realize is the effect that this has upon the success of building a friendship between two aspies on opposite sides.

An aspie who remains true to self will use time and energy to understand how he is different from neurotypicals, but he will not try to be someone he is not.  An aspie who desperately seeks to blend in with the neurotypical world will believe it is possible to eventually succeed at this without having to experience anything negative later.

Because non-conforming aspies travel in a different direction than those living for approval from neurotypicals, a split eventually develops.  For example, both opposing aspies may care what might hurt a neurotypical’s feelings. Where they differ is the degree at which they will sacrifice themselves.  The non-conformist cares as much about having his own feelings hurt by NTs as he does about possibly hurting the NT’s. However, the conforming aspie is too busy being concerned about offending NTs to fully know what outcome his behavior will cause.

A non-conforming aspie is willing to compromise with an NT half-way, if he sees that his different way of perceiving things will be respected.  An analogy of this would be two people from different cultures explaining and sharing their customs with each other in order to better understand one another.

A conforming aspie also compromises.  The difference with his compromise is that it’s total; thereby requiring no compromises from NTs.  These ‘chameleon’ aspies don’t realize the long-term harm they’re doing by trying to hide their neuro-A-typicalness.

Conformists believe they are the ones who are being unselfish. What’s not realized is that their motive is selfish even though their behavior is superficially altruistic. Imagine how ridiculous it would be if a parent always gave in to their child’s wishes. The child would think his parent is being unselfish whenever his mom or dad behaves how he wants. He would be blind to see that he is really the selfish one. An aspie who tries to behave neurotypical is blind to see he is being selfish by hoping he will get what he wants by being what he is not.

In a social situation, where there is a mix of aspie characters among a predominantly NT crowd, the half-way compromising aspie is bound to irritate the totally compromising one. His refusal to completely give up his aspieness will be a sore reminder to the chameleon aspie that he is not an NT no matter how much he may try to act like one.

Every human being is a juror¹ throughout his entire life.   If he wasn’t, then he wouldn’t be able to make decisions about how to relate with other people.  This is why it is constructive to have labels and categories.  ’Mentally organizing’ becomes abused when one does it for his own benefit to excuse himself from caring about those who he cannot understand.  People might think someone doesn’t care about them, if the ‘juror’ decides to cease from becoming further acquainted.  Usually that is true, but it’s also equally true that one may be continuing to care about the person he no longer associates with.  If the shunned person tries to judge what’s in the other person’s heart, he is trying to play god.  Only God knows the motive, but most people will not accept this lack of control over knowing the truth.  They can’t do so when God doesn’t have His rightful place in their life.  They want to be accepted by mankind rather than resting in peace knowing that they are accepted by God.

Some degree of understanding typically exists when caring about others.  The problem though is that understanding usually doesn’t happen automatically.  When it does, it’s most likely because of sharing the same characteristics (e.g., neurotypical, asperger, autistic, alcoholic, nationality, elderly, materialistic, similar upbringing, shared faith, etc.).  But then there are other characteristics that further divide the way the common ones might create an outcome (e.g., increased pride→ often rationalized as becoming a ‘stronger’ person, being humbled→ thereby increasing meekness, turning bitter→ due to one’s perception of priorities in life, etc.).

Problems happen when people are not content with simply making judgments and carry it to the next step by wanting to also be the judge.  Only the judge is authorized to decide the sentence (the only trustworthy judge of mankind is the one who created man).  Judgments (acting as a juror, figuratively speaking) are not what has a person acting like god.  Assuming the role of judge is what makes one their own god.  This is what self-righteous people do.  Either a person trusts God and His Word or they must trust their own relative concepts of what’s right versus wrong.

Readers of this blog can make judgments of me being aspergers rather than neurotypical, Christian rather than an unbeliever, conservative rather than liberal, Finn-American rather than another ancestry, aged rather than a child, etc. I can read other blogs and make my own judgments of those authors too.  That’s okay, but when people act like god and believe it’s their duty to judge another person, then the outcome of rationalization begins.

Rationalizing is destructive when one condemns another for being different. Condemning and having an opinion are not the same thing.  For example, I am (and will always be) of the option to call same-sex behavior a sin.² A sin will always remain sinful and absolute (unchanging).  Sexual immorality is relative and constantly changing. The younger a person is, the less he can realize this. Fornication is a sin, along with adultery, prostitution, and pornography. Such terms are as concrete as day and night. All throughout time, day meant day and night meant night. How many people stop to think deeply about why this is?

My option of the view behind why certain things are left alone and accepted versus other things being controversial has to do with the characteristics that make up an individual.  The most vital characteristics are also the most hidden. No one has the ability to know another person. This inability to know even extends into one’s own self. Not too often are confessions heard about this, but they do happen sometimes. For example, during National Geographic’s episodes of Locked Up Abroad, often times the young women in those stories are shocked to discover how easily they deceived themselves into believing a lie simply because they wanted something.  It’s easy for others to misjudge themselves by believing they’re not foolish like those who make such mistakes.

That same ease to deceive one’s own self is the culprit behind divisions that eventually lead to murder and war.  World peace, harmony, unity, etc. is IMPOSSIBLE.  Why don’t the people, who protest every war, look at their own bumper sticker laden cars and see that same spirit of war as those who support troops?  The true peacemakers are quietly praying for others instead of aggressively seeking to trespass upon opposing viewpoints.  Free speech per se is not what’s violent. Violence occurs when seeking to silence the ‘repulsive’ side.   During election time, it’s typically the protestors for peace who try to take away the signs put up by those with opposing politics.

The more ungodly a society becomes, the more intolerant its members will be towards those who are different.³ Satan has done a masterful craft of deception to twist this around, thereby causing people to believe the opposite. People think because same-sex behavior is tolerated, diverse cultures are taught to be embraced (except for Christianity), and the use of the word ‘sin’ becoming exterminated from public use, that this is evidence that mankind is evolving towards world peace.

True peace (for now) can only exist within one’s own soul and that’s impossible without salvation from the greatest enemy→ one’s own sinfulness.

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;” — Romans 3:23

¹In this case, instead of a person taking an oath of allegiance to the law of the land, one remains loyal to his own acceptable legal system.  Unfortunately, most people (usually those who are more materially ‘blessed’) abide by the Hypocritical Rule of, “Don’t treat others the way you want others to treat you.”

²I’m exercising my first amendment rights.  This may tempt some bigots (prejudiced people who are intolerant of any opinions differing from their own) to make libelous links to my blog.  They might support neurodiversity; however, you’ll be able to detect their intolerance towards those with a different faith and/or political view by how blind they are to their own hypocrisy.

³This is not a pure statement.  It’s generalizing.  Tolerance has increased in some areas, but overall it has not.  Intolerance today is more covert and subtle than in the past.

~ Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 3:17:44 PM

~ Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 2:11:20 PM, as traveling up the Shawangunk Mountain facing the Catskill Mountains to the west.

Waterfall

Since my well of wise words seems to be in a drought stage, I’m resorting to pictures.

I’ve heard it said, “Pictures are worth a thousand words.”  I shot the above photo in October of 1973.

Today, this same view isn’t so pretty.  It seems ironic that places which attract people to come move into an area cause it to become unattractive.  Newcomers cannot realize this because they don’t know how things looked before they moved in.

Fresh Air

This photo (I took in September of 1980) represents a hypersensitive Aspie’s calmest environment! Yes, that’s a dirt floor hut on the right. No roads, electric, airplanes, convenient stores, plumbing, tourists, etc. were up here on Volcán Barú back then!

Now it’s invaded by tourists hiking up the mountain. Greedy foreigners have ruined the city of Bouquete, that’s down on its eastern flank, with buildings like those in Sedona, Arizona… complete with mini-malls!

Here is a joke that’s not so funny ↓

On the bottom of a monthly statement it says, “Enjoy extra free time each month, pay bills with your credit card at our website.” (I’m not saying the company’s name since that info is irrelevant.)

Just above that line, it says, “Help protect your credit, sign up for the privacy assist premier service to help fight identity theft.  Learn more at our website today.”

Obviously whenever you’re asked to “sign up” for for a service, it’s not free.  That means (if you’re not financially wealthy) you will need to spend more time at work to earn the money needed to buy their identity theft insurance.  So then how can that person be enjoying extra free time each month by paying his bills online when he has to purchase protection for doing so?

The bigger question is, “Why do innocent people have to suffer consequences (by being pressured to buy identity theft insurance) while the guilty get to enjoy stealing others’ good credit to use for their own pleasure (and then when they’re done, they sell that info to someone else who wants to do the same crime?!)?”

If you don’t know why these kinds of trends happen, it’s because those in society who are responsible for making criminals to be accountable fall into the temptation to look for the easiest and fastest way out of each case so they can then “look good” at their job.  Generally speaking, whenever law enforcement personnel think they can accomplish blaming innocent people by knowing that their victims lack the resources to find out who the guilty really are (as in the case of identity thieves), they’re going to take advantage of such situations.

The more that people resort to buying identity theft insurance, the less these ‘identity’ criminals will be persecuted.