![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fajrdrakoLast night I tried sleeping in my bed for the first time since I broke The Foot. It felt good; but at about 3 a.m. I woke up wanting a painkiller, and went back to the sofa.
Early morning: read Torchwood fanfic, then watched Doctor Who 4x03 "The Planet of the Ood" by myself, and then the Doctor Who Confidential "Oods and Ends" (love the title). Then had a nice visit from
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
maaseru, and josanpq came over with a Swiss Chalet lunch, and we talked about fandom and her school and she brought me a wonderful pile of books to read. Then commodorified came over and we sat outside for a bit so I could enjoy the sunshine - and I went out on crutches, not my walker. Then we watched the Oysterband DVD, which was nicely unstressful.After
commodorified left, maaseru and maaboroshi came down and we ate pizza (I was really way too full) and watched Battlestar Galactica episode 4x05, "The Ties that Bind". Intersting plot developments. And I'd talk more about all this but I feel exhausted...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 03:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 03:11 pm (UTC)But not being able to sleep a whole night in your own bed must be *hard* Sends hugs
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 05:56 pm (UTC)What is the quote in your icon?
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 06:40 pm (UTC)It's one of a batch (http://smithy161.livejournal.com/468989.html#cutid1)
It's from Joe Abercrombie's "The Blade Itself". There's a good one there about tea being the cure for all ills - except an axe in the head...
OR um did you mean you couldn't make out the text?
"What is that? Some spell? Some poison? Some work of high art?"
"Tea."
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 07:11 pm (UTC)I guess I should read Abercrombie.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 07:34 pm (UTC)I've told myself I'll have to read some Abercrombie - they sound like fun.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 04:58 pm (UTC)Tip: I kept a bag --the nice kind they give you at boutiques, or a gift bag-- full of everything I wanted near me. Painkillers, book, baggies of snacks, cell phone, whatever. When it's time to go from one room to another, it's easy to hook the handles on your wrist and doesn't interfere with the crutches.
*sends you warm sunshine*
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 05:58 pm (UTC)No, my hands aren't sore, at least, not yet. I haven't used them enough. I do have callouses forming on my palms near the wrists, where the weight mostly goes.
Yes, I plan to do something like that with a bad - I have a panda bag all lined up for it. Meanwhile I'm using the little basket on my walker. Nice to have options!
Looks like more warm sunshine out there today - I hope to go out later.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-21 09:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-22 12:52 pm (UTC)I look forward to that!
Meanwhile - I got your package. O happy day! Thank you, thank you, thank you!
no subject
Date: 2008-04-22 04:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-22 04:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-22 07:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-22 05:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-22 12:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-23 10:42 pm (UTC)Here, I came up with a way of trying to describe this... some of it. No, I already told you about the visual/peripheral thing, didn't I? That was a good illustration, still. Instead of one single "main" visual area, in the front (as in, directly ahead), I have not three main visual input fields (directly ahead, to the left, to the right) but a single main visual input field: it extends from my extreme left peripheral visual field all the way around to my extreme right peripheral visual field. Anything that exists in any of that area is "directly in front of my eyes."
See why some autistic activists insist that neurotypical individuals are the ones who are "impaired," because of the typical NT "limit" on their area of highest visual acuity? Interesting concept.
Someday I'll come up with an illustration to help translate my auditory input hyper-sensitivity, too.
But I'm still almost as blown out as I was Sunday night when I tried to phone; not only can I not differentiate what I hear, I also still cannot really process thought into verbalization. I think this has to do with the medications I took to make sure I didn't get motion sickness on the long trip, and the allergy medicine I took maybe too much of because of the nasty reaction I started to have to the cleaning chemicals in the hotel's main lobby and meeting areas. It seems that these medications contribute to my being much less able to deal, moment to moment, with sensory onslaught. Er, as in, the usual overdose of sensory input then becomes a pure sensory onslaught... gave myself away in a most Freudian way, eh?
Call you some other time! [g]
no subject
Date: 2008-04-24 12:49 am (UTC)I understand why they'd say this, but it's really silly to talk about "impairment" for either side of the spectrum. We each have the visual/conceptual/perceptual pattern we are born with, and deal with it as it is. It isn't something that anyone has any choice about.
I'll come up with an illustration to help translate my auditory input hyper-sensitivity, too.
Why? Do you think it's something I don't understand?
no subject
Date: 2008-04-24 01:18 am (UTC)Thank you. You took the tension right out of my shoulders. I have to defend this very basic idea just about every time I bring it up (which I usually do only because an incident of bigotry incites me to speak up to try to enlighten people).
Thank you. You took the tension right out of my shoulders. I have to defend this very basic idea just about every time I bring it up (which I usually do only because an incident of bigotry incites me to speak up to try to enlighten people).
<i?Why? Do you think it's something I don't understand?</i>
I apologize sincerely for giving the impression that I may think that you do not understand this. That was not my intention.
I was carried away on the thought that just about everyone else I'd talk to about this would have a hard time accepting that it was so, and so I am in the habit (almost automatic, I might say) of jumping into finding a second line of explanation as soon as the first one has come out of me. Again, I apologize. (You understand these things better than I do, quite often, I have found.)
no subject
Date: 2008-04-24 01:21 am (UTC)I'm glad.
I was carried away on the thought that just about everyone else I'd talk to about this would have a hard time accepting that it was so, and so I am in the habit (almost automatic, I might say) of jumping into finding a second line of explanation as soon as the first one has come out of me.
Undertandable. But I find the concept of 'sensory overload' easy to understand. You do sometime mention things I don't understand, but this isn't one of them.
also
Date: 2008-04-24 01:21 am (UTC)I don't think either sort of people are impaired. I think that the attitude taken towards your differences by the people around you can determine, to a great extent, how "impaired" you end up being taken as, for the duration of that encounter. And I'm still struggling with phrasing that concept well enough to be able to use it when I find myself in the situation of needing it, so please forgive me for practicing on you one final time!
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-24 02:03 am (UTC)So sometimes when you say things like that I think, "Huh? What is she saying? She knows I know that!"
I'm still struggling with phrasing that concept well enough to be able to use it when I find myself in the situation of needing it, so please forgive me for practicing on you one final time!
Yeah, feel free to rehearse!
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-24 02:19 am (UTC)Yes. As you've already noticed, I need practice in social/verbal interaction. Basically, every time I have one (either a conversation, or a nonverbal interaction), I am trying to do what I intend to do in such a situation. I succeed to one degree or the other, and then reflect on it, and then... wait for the next time, to try again. This is what I must do. If I do not practice, I end up talking and interacting like the autistic people who cannot keep from acting autistic in public, and get stepped away from and/or stared at or talked about. This is my reality. And I'm always one or two flubbed interactions away from having people step back, stare, and stop answering me. This is just the way things are for me. Just making an observation, not making a judgment.
You have helped me practice, immensely. Even before we met in person, you were helping me learn how to do this.
In almost every verbal encounter you and I have had, I have kept the awareness of an observor on my own [um] performance. The act of putting thoughts into words and other social-interactional communication coding bits (body language, stance, so on) is a skill that I learned and am still perfecting; I am never not aware of my own performance. (Those times when you said I was thinking too much, this is what you were perceiving. And I do not feel harshly because you said that. Neither of us understood it, at the time. I certainly didn't.)
Anyway, I now see that I'm always going to seem at least a little bit "detached" or "artificial" when I talk with someone, just because I am, honestly, continually searching for the appropriate behaviour bits for each situation and moment as it all evolves. I guess some people see this and take it as an indication that I am insincere. Or putting on a blatant act. Or lying. Hm.
So... as I contemplate this major realization that you have just led me to, let me add: if you think of it, in the future, when I do end up saying something to you that you are pretty sure I already know you already know, it would be interesting to see if it helps me out if you were to speak up and say so. I don't know if that would make my mental process grind to a halt, or -- I think more likely -- help me have a way of marking our interactions as unique, and ones in which I can try to start not speaking in, in such a generalized way. Hm? What do you think? If you're up to it. And it may confuse me momentarily, because at those times I am completely in the moment with very little short-term memory (hard to explain; trust me), but it won't harm me. And I don't think I'll bark at you!
It's all art. Life, interaction, compassion... it's all art.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-24 02:32 am (UTC)I am so glad. I've learned a lot from you, too - not so much about myself (though some, surely) but mostly about the nature of perception, thought, and the relationships between instinct, emotion, perception, and action. Which is of course all too complex to ever really understand in anyone, but you've helped me understand it better than I did before.
Those times when you said I was thinking too much, this is what you were perceiving. And I do not feel harshly because you said that. Neither of us understood it, at the time. I certainly didn't.
Yes. I could see the thought and the self-consciousness that most people don't have, and was addressing that. Then I came to understand better what you were doing and why you were doing it.
I guess some people see this and take it as an indication that I am insincere. Or putting on a blatant act.
Probably more that they don't know what is strange about your conversation, and that lack of knowing - being unable to think of a reason - is more unsettling than any certainty would be.
f you think of it, in the future, when I do end up saying something to you that you are pretty sure I already know you already know, it would be interesting to see if it helps me out if you were to speak up and say so.
We'll see what I can do. If I understand you correctly here, you're wondering how it would be if you were in a conversation where you didn't feel the need to start from the basic explanations that you're used to giving. To see if you could get to another level.
My suspicion is that you can, and that we've done it, just sitting and talking in my living room. It isn't something you sustain for long but it's smooth and flowing when it happens.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-24 02:53 am (UTC)We'll see what I can do. If I understand you correctly here, you're wondering how it would be if you were in a conversation where you didn't feel the need to start from the basic explanations that you're used to giving. To see if you could get to another level.
Not quite. I'm hoping that you can call me back to the moment -- which will be, you and I sitting talking, and me having no need to be "panoramic" in my mental orientation right then. Sort of.
My suspicion is that you can, and that we've done it, just sitting and talking in my living room. It isn't something you sustain for long but it's smooth and flowing when it happens.
True enough. And, yes. I remember those "flow" moments sometimes utterly verbatim -- um, I mean, hold on a moment. I'd say I keep them in my immediately-accessible memory area, and still in their full glory as eidetic saturation-experiences. Usually, my memories are all stored,a nd I need to follow links to get to them. The links are not always voluntary -- thus, when someone ... uh, I can't use that example. Another one. When I wear the color red, I have a hard time blocking my memory-links from taking me back to when I was a child and wore red shorts and got violently ill in the car. I cannot erase these things, it seems. (The one I stopped myself from tellig is one of the key points of my life, and involves a person's nickname. If you ask me in person, I may tell you.)
Well, anyway: my guess is that, when you bring this to my attention when you and I are in your living room talking, I will react as if you have poured ice-water on my back. Seriously. So, don't be surprised if I go totally nonverbal for a space of time! Just stay silent and wait, and I'll come back to the moment. I suspect this will happen, because it'll be that jarring to be moved out of the mental rut/roadway of doing this sort of thing practically automatically. But it will not be a bad thing. And -- well, can you see now why I'm asking you to do it to help me out? I doubt I could do it all on my own.
The smooth and flowing aspect is deeply, readily apparent to me. I feel that I can do that, achieve that state of balance, pretty much for any situation... and this is part of why I can become so frustrated, and down on myself, when I do flub up an interaction: in my head, I clearly know the ideal, and know that I have been there, and wish that I could stay that much in balance at all times.
Especially with you. Because it feels so wonderful. Doesn't it?
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-24 02:07 pm (UTC)Help you catch the moment of awareness, then? Consciously?
well, can you see now why I'm asking you to do it to help me out? I doubt I could do it all on my own.
In this case, no, I can't quite see what I'd be doing, but I'll do it anyway.
in my head, I clearly know the ideal, and know that I have been there, and wish that I could stay that much in balance at all times.</i. Life's like that, wishing that we could do the right thing all the time, and in the right way. But we can't. Except sometimes.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-27 05:05 am (UTC)Yes. Because when I flub up the most is when I drive away my natural tendency to try to be conscious of everything, and try to force myself to go as fast as those around me are going. And I have realized that I have this now so ingrained that I do it even when in the company of just one person who knows exactly who I am, with whom I certainly don't need to try to pretend to be NT.
And, actually, thinking it over again now a few days later, I see that you are completely accurate in what you said there, too. Sorry, oops.
can you see now why I'm asking you to do it to help me out? I doubt I could do it all on my own.
In this case, no, I can't quite see what I'd be doing, but I'll do it anyway.
No? Oh. Um...
...I just can't switch it off by myself. I think. It would take someone outside to say, "Wait, hold on: look at what you are dcing. Is it what you want to be doing?" I can, I think, make it start, but then cannot just step out of it, because I designed it to be self-perpetuating. Because the usual NT type of verbal interaction has no stop-and-look-back feature, at least not in this one single narrow idea that's in my head right now and it's late and I'm still totally worn out from doing twelve hours yesterday and I've stated this very, very poorly. Sigh.
I may just say good night and hope you don't mind my verbal clumsiness too much. Sorry!
But really. I have the ideal in my head. I can reach it. I'm not saying others aren't like that too.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-27 02:01 pm (UTC)Which you can do better sometimes than at other times.
I may just say good night and hope you don't mind my verbal clumsiness too much
No problem. I just do my best to follow you, and if I don't understand, I ask, or rephrase, or ask you to rephrase. I had no problem here.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-27 10:44 pm (UTC)And which, at those times, feels quite good. Which is probably why I so often try to force myself into it when I'm not able to accomplish it. Also, result there of internalized "just try! you're making that up! do it for me!" pressure from nonstop.
No problem. I just do my best to follow you, and if I don't understand, I ask, or rephrase, or ask you to rephrase. I had no problem here.
While I was totally drowning in my inability to get anything worthwhile out. If you could compare the stuff you read to what was in my head that I wanted to say, you'd realize.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-28 12:12 am (UTC)If only that were possible! or simple. I wonder if telepathy would make the communications problems easier, or worse.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-29 05:58 am (UTC)I think it would be beneficial to be able to have a window at which you could invite someone to observe what you are trying to communicate... but, also, it would be horrible to have people just taking your private thoughts from you.
Let's talk about telepathy. Later. The computer lab is closing right now. Everyday telepathy.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-29 02:07 pm (UTC)And as such, I'm not sure whether it helps communications or hinders them. It helps with animals, a lot of the time.
People can't take private thoughts. The problem is not hiding them, the problem is in revealing them, which isn't so easy.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-30 11:24 pm (UTC)Agreed there. In my own life, I've found it keeps me from coping in social situations often enough, when I can perceive so clearly that what someone is portraying publicly is not at all what that person really is thinking or wishes to be able to portray. This was worse for me when I was much younger; then, I'd often just stop talking altogether and give up.
It helps with animals, a lot of the time.
Oh, yes! Just earlier today I was having a chat with my little tiger cat that was part telepathy, part verbalization. She enjoyed it very much (judging by how she giggled). And, with dogs, I never was able to communicate at all, until I gave in and started to do it their way: totally nonverbally.
People can't take private thoughts. The problem is not hiding them, the problem is in revealing them, which isn't so easy.
Ah. You are wise.
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-30 11:32 pm (UTC)I bet that made a big difference! I've never had any problem communicating with dogs; they're just so expressive. (Like budgies, in their way.)
Re: also
Date: 2008-04-30 11:54 pm (UTC)I was more used to interacting with cats, and it is true that the two sorts of creature speak similarly, but ... dogs are somehow different enough that, for many years, I floundered in trying to figure them out. Maybe -- cats are subtle by choice, and dogs are out there and all over you. Hey, that could be it. And I was not an "out there" kind of person -- it made me uncomfortable, because that introduced too many variables and I could not keep up with them.
Now, budgies, I still cannot find a way to talk with. Yours always look at me hesitantly and sheepishly, seeming to wonder why I am not speaking to them as they expect to be spoken to. Any advice?
Re: also
Date: 2008-05-01 04:24 am (UTC)One has to earn respect with dogs, and I'm not sure simple communication will ever earn it unless you are their owner or friend. But dogs have a lot to offer nevertheless, and they're very good on instinctual understanding and general friendliness - if you seem like someone they would want to be friendly with.
And dogs are totally honest. They try to lie ("No, I didn't chew that slipper! it wasn't me! it was the budgie!") but they aren't very convincing. They are therefore as honest as honest can be.
Due to my allergies, I have as little interaction with cats as possible. This means, of course, that cats love me and come running to cuddle in my lap or rub my nose with theirs, especially if we are in a room full of people who love cats and would love to be able to pet one, while I am the only one cowering and hoping it won't come near me. This has led me to believe that cats are very contrary creatures.
Advice re budgie-talk: just don't worry about it. They do their own thing. Think of them as listeners and singers - don't expect real-time interaction, but admire them for their colourful beauty and singing skills.