The problem ones have social gifts and rational disabilities, not the other way about. I am postulating, in lieu of our sociopath CEO’s a sort of a super-Allist.

“Normal,” to the point of disorder.

I want to revisit the definitions of the antisocial neurotypes mentioned in the first, psychopathy and APD and say that from my own social . . . situation, OK, disorder, from my perhaps asocial neurotype, I want to say that a psycho- or sociopath being charming and succeeding socially doesn’t look different than anyone else being charming and succeeding socially. Honestly, when Allists are speaking among themselves and charming and succeeding with one another, I don’t always understand it, so it doesn’t necessarily always seem authentic and organic to me.

I suppose if there were a sociopath in the group saying the same things and responding appropriately and succeeding in the group, I wouldn’t see any difference at all. And . . . not sure this is cool to say, I’m uh . . . I don’t see how anyone would, I mean if I could grok how anyone knows the difference, I suppose I could do it too. If they are saying and apparently feeling the same things, what is different?

Social success is social success, everyone has to fake it – and you don’t build it for yourself. If a predatory psychopath has a lot of social success, that’s on their whole group, not just them! “Social success,” is not an individual achievement, is it?

Ah there it is, popped up and surprised me – our “psychopath CEOs,” are hypersocial if they over-achieve, more social than the regular Allists, who all seem hypersocial to my sort to begin with. If this is “cold, calculating manipulation,” then their whole crew is almost as good at it as they are, I mean, then cold, calculating manipulation is what brings social success, at least in that group.

But the point, already made without saying so, I’m afraid, is that a monster’s social success is as real as anybody’s, and it comes from their social group – so was everybody, “pretending?” And if so, what’s the difference between that and everyone not pretending, if they’re all doing and saying the same scripts?

I want to shut up and write a book instead. In my world, this is an automatic pop-psych Number One best seller, and I’m giving it away to nobody for free.

Jeff

Nov. 22^nd., 2023

Carrying on with the idea of Allism as a neurotype with a short spike for actuarial matters, and of Allistic psychology as almost exclusively a matter of the self and not society, I wish to extrapolate something, specifically that we should see problematic personality types along a different vector than the psychology of individuals.

I will need to start with the dictionaries and definitions – it does sound like “sociopathy,” already draws this distinction from psychopathy, I need to check that, plus we’ll have to do Autism/Allism again. Alphabetically, I suppose.

Allism

 – this is understood to be the majority or “normal,” neurotype, often interchangeable with “neurotypical,” but “Allism,” has etymology, “Allo,” is from the Greek for “Other,” and I believe the inference is that it describes a mind that connects with and is concerned with others, with the people around us, but I don’t think we have a list of Allistic traits as such, a definition as such, it is most often explained simply as the absence of, or opposite of Autism.

If there is any list of traits and features, it is most often gleaned through the looking glass, approved Allistic traits are to be found in their pathologized mirror traits among the neurodivergent, such as the name shows, “Autistic,” means self defined or involved, so “Allistic,” means connected, more of a group orientation.

Just Me:

For my part, I have extrapolated things already, and I have theories about Allism in and of itself, I have spent my life trying to understand them, I never knew what I was, but I guess I always knew I wasn’t one of them. For me, Allism is a version of humanity with a “specific set of skills,” yes, meant exactly like the action movie meant it, Allism is humankind’s warrior neurotype, and war is a group activity.

While peace looks more like parallel play.

Autism

 – ha, I only have my own, I’m having a hard time writing down the usual definition for you. “Aut,” is the Greek for self, as in automatic and autonomous, so Autistic is “self –“ self directed, surely self-stimulation created this meme, self involved, in the simplest terms, we don’t listen and do what we’re told, we think we’re supposed to listen to our own minds or something, at least this is why we’re a problem and a thing, we’re not much good in a group project.

There are a lot of health problems that seem to come with it, and they are part of the working definition of Autism, notably verbalization and sensory issues, and as the brain runs the body, that does seem to be a part of one’s neurotype.

Just Me:

For my part, I need to turn the entire edifice upside down and say, yes, “a part of one’s neurotype,” but that this statement in not directional, and that the presence of much variance does not make a type, rather that that the adherence to a specific set of traits is what makes a type, and so Autism is less of a specific “type,” than Allism is, that rather perhaps what we call “Autism,” is many types, perhaps the label “Autism,” or maybe “neurodivergence” in general is the whole gene pool and Allism is the emergent, specific, purpose built “type.” With a rather obvious purpose, mentioned above. A purpose that I would hope humanity will some day abandon.

OK, I’d better crack open a dictionary for these Allistic psychology terms, my intuition is probably wrong.

Psychopathy

 – from the N.I.H (USA):

“Psychopathy is a neuropsychiatric disorder marked by deficient emotional responses, lack of empathy, and poor behavioral controls, commonly resulting in persistent antisocial deviance and criminal behavior.”

–  from somewhere high on Google’s list, place called PsychopathyIs:

“Psychopathy  (sai · kaa · puh · thee) is a common mental disorder. It is characterized by personality traits that include reduced empathy and remorse, a bold and daring personality, and difficulty inhibiting behaviors.

People with psychopathy may deceive, manipulate, exploit, threaten, steal from, or physically harm others. At the same time, they may seem outwardly friendly and well adjusted. This ‘mask of sanity,’ described in the quote above, can make psychopathic people very hard to identify.

Psychopathic traits vary across the population from mild to extreme. In other words, psychopathy is a spectrum disorder, like other well-known spectrum disorders such as autism and anxiety. Severe psychopathy can cause significant impairment and affects approximately 1% of children and adults in the United States today.”

– from Psychology Today (and Good Lord, they’re catty):

 “Psychopathy is a condition characterized by the absence of empathy and the blunting of other affective states. Callousness, detachment, and a lack of empathy enable psychopaths to be highly manipulative. Nevertheless, psychopathy is among the most difficult disorders to spot.

Psychopaths can appear normal, even charming. Underneath, they lack any semblance of conscience. Their antisocial nature inclines them often (but by no means always) to criminality.

Just Me:

– I’ll summarize: perhaps what makes it not the majority type is that psychopaths apparently don’t let public opinion bother them or change their behaviour, one might almost apply the “Aut,” syllable to that, but again, for me, I think that just makes them not, or less Allistic, going with what other people think seems to be an Allistic feature.

As an Autist, I clench at the word “empathy,” but perhaps it’s appropriate for psychopathy to say it isn’t there or is attenuated. For my “just me,” section, I will say that this language is all psychological and ahistorical, or asociological, I mean it refers to people in the present tense, people are used, people are hurt – as often with what I think of as Allistic psychology, there is no attention paid to the future, to the ongoing cause and effect, the reverberations of this hurt through time, I mean, a classic movie psychopath doesn’t worry about the pain the knife causes the victim, and this is the psychological definition – but he doesn’t worry about the future either, about the altered lives that didn’t end, about his victim’s children, he doesn’t worry about generally adding to the misery of humanity and bringing the next apocalyptic reset a little closer. I think?

There’s some of my Antisocialization Theory in there, that you can’t just keep adding to the misery forever, that there is a cycle to it, a point of critical mass and an explosion, or implosion, a reset, the Antisocialization Jubilee like a world war or a total collapse. An actuarial idea, I suppose.

The classic psycho lacks empathy AND actuarial sense, maybe? That ought to have stopped him too. The two things are surely related and connected, and mostly move through the world together . . . or not?

One may be rarer than the other, in some sense perhaps instead they exist in inverse proportion, even, perhaps me and my friends can be tight and caring about one another as we wage war on the world, then we’d have empathy and not be psychopaths, pass for “normal,” and lack only the actuarial empathy – and destroy the world?

But perhaps I digress and I’m so far behind I only think I’m leading. Back to the dictionary.

Sociopathy –

OK, I’m out of date, it’s called Antisocial Personality Disorder now – but maybe only the name has been updated, it just sounds like “psychopathy, only just the bad kind,” more impulsivity, more violence, less disguise. The following excerpts are a little contradictory, it seems a good definition is still a matter of debate.

– from the Mayo Clinic:

“Antisocial personality disorder, sometimes called sociopathy, is a mental health condition in which a person consistently shows no regard for right and wrong and ignores the rights and feelings of others. People with antisocial personality disorder tend to purposely make others angry or upset and manipulate or treat others harshly or with cruel indifference. They lack remorse or do not regret their behavior.

People with antisocial personality disorder often violate the law, becoming criminals. They may lie, behave violently or impulsively, and have problems with drug and alcohol use. They have difficulty consistently meeting responsibilities related to family, work or school.”

– from Psychology Today (and again . . . bitchy, I guess, LOL):

“Sociopathy refers to a pattern of antisocial behaviors and attitudes, including manipulation, deceit, aggression, and a lack of empathy for others. Sociopathy is a non-diagnostic term, and it is not synonymous with “psychopathy,” though the overlap leads to frequent confusion. Sociopaths may or may not break the law, but by exploiting and manipulating others, they violate the trust that the human enterprise runs on.”

Just Me:

For my two cents’ worth, again, it’s all present tense, clearly this person doesn’t seem to be worried about what sort of world they are creating with their behaviour, and . . . I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, or maybe me and others of my type, but the speaker, the folks telling me about it don’t address the world of tomorrow either, the way psychology reads to me, mainstream psychology, Allistic psychology only ever sounds like a personal matter, interpersonal at most . . . I’m sorry, I know I’m not landing this thought, but let’s leave it there for a moment. If I can tie the whole thing off, it will because we got there with this bit, leaving this dangling forever is not an option.

If you’re seeing this, we got through it, hang in there.

-OK, sort of. For this, what the hey, I’ve already said it elsewhere. Allism has an attenuated or missing actuarial sense, and I am calling the psychology they have developed “Allistic Psychology,” because it somehow never translates into sociology or what people’s behaviour does to the world, it seems stuck on one’s personal pain, the social aspects, reaching no further than something specific about our parents or our kids. One has the sense that abuse is rare, a minority issue for most, because it is never spoken of in bigger, cultural terms, at least in the future.

Regarding the ‘Psycho and Sociopath CEO’ Theory

I think I hit it already, on route, that it’s a separate matter, whether you have empathy and whether you have actuarial empathy, the vision for the people of the future, right? Empathy is nice, in its way, but it is at best, not enough. We are still creating circumstances that no amount of mere empathy is going to fix, our empathy is extremely short sighted if it can’t deal with a plague, or pollution, climate change, etc., if it seems to be no prophylaxis for conflict and war.

What I really want to get at, only hinted at off the top, is the idea that psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder are not the most useful and productive ways to think about the most callous of our leaders and CEOs, that this pop psych meme isn’t helpful.

I mean, what are we to do, run our Earth-consuming money making machines with more heart? Somehow keep the psychotics out of the destroying the world for money industries? Keep them out of the army?

I think if it were a matter of any minority so small as psychopaths, fixing the world’s problems would be pretty much doable, our problems, I’m sorry, I suppose this is hard to hear when unlike myself you spent your whole life thinking you were normal and that’s good – our problems are because something is terribly wrong with most humans. Even if it were only that we’re too wild or stupid to control a few psychopaths and let them trash the world and kill us all, there would still be something terribly wrong with all of us for that, and it isn’t only that.

I mean really – oh, perhaps I oughtn’t be writing just now after all – stupid wins, doesn’t it? Never mind, that’s not going anywhere. Ha.

The point – the corporate and military worlds are very social, very human, social structures, meaning there are a lot of group dynamics going on, and it’s all about friends and enemies – I think those friends sort of take most neurodivergent people out of the picture as leaders, probably the psychopaths and APD folks too, mostly. I think the leaders are not socially disabled, but perhaps they even have superpowers in that area, and so this theory about a percentage of people with antisocial disorders being our CEOs and leaders is . . . I know, bizarre, but read me, I do this a lot – backwards, totally.

My neurodivergence means something, damnit. Yes, upside down and backwards.

The problem ones have social gifts and rational disabilities, not the other way about. I am postulating, in lieu of our sociopath CEO’s a sort of a super-Allist.

“Normal,” to the point of disorder.

More to come, probably.

Jeff

Nov. 3^rd., 2023

Allism, the majority neurotype, is humankind in warrior mode.

It’s a set of options that optimizes the human animal for its group conflict, which is the standard explanation for the size of our brains, our supposed intelligence, the learning curve of conflict – and that’s problematic, isn’t it, it’s a thing that evolved because the environment changed – but the environment was us, so the environment changed because we changed too. It adds complexity, human social environments do not appear in the fossil record, and while the evidence of conflict is almost the only evidence we have, stone weapons and broken skeletons, that is all there could be, really, so it doesn’t prove much. We don’t get to look and say the equivalent of see it was wet here then and dried out over centuries, we have no corroboration, no physical trace of past social environments, no evidence for social change that would oblige us to explain how it shaped us.

I mean, even if we wanted to, which, this would be us searching for actuarial evidence and knowledge about ourselves – and for most, “Human Nature,” has already answered, made these questions irrelevant – people don’t change. Sure, maybe apes did, mindlessly, in response to the climate, etc., but “people,” don’t, and certainly not for each other. We are apparently controllable, but not changeable.

Again, I’m trying to shout and I think I sound like Goldblum, you’d think I was talking about the menu when I said in the first part, “ . . . the “Human Nature,” in which the Allistic finds us lacking and themselves lamentable but inevitable is really only one neurotype, and one with an off switch . . . ”  – I suppose it’s a different conversation, but this is not really an abstraction, “Human Nature,” – the whole world is structured around, it, I mean politically and legally.

“People don’t change,” is fucking law, despite the obvious falsity of it.

If law acknowledged causality in human affairs, it would disappear. With no static “Nature,” to simply control, a policeman is only hurting people and causing all the same problems as the criminals – which is exactly the case, in my mind. Sigh.

I’m not getting closer to the point, so let’s just teleport there and start again.

“Autism,” isn’t a thing; it’s only an attempt to define “non-Allism,” – but Allism, ironically to an Allist, is a thing, a discreet, heritable, definable thing, with specific traits and functions. It’s counterintuitive, because the numbers are sort of backwards, but Allism is a genetic thing, a variance, a sort of a mutation – while what we call “Autism,” is probably the whole gene pool. No?

So tell me, what are the Autistic traits and functions?

Isn’t every savant different?

Isn’t there a great deal of variety within what we call “Autism,” Autists who work and succeed, and Autists who can’t get out of bed? At some point, you have to give up explaining how everything is “Autism,” except a few things that are part of a much narrower spectrum, and name the narrow bit instead, Allism. Again: what if we are the whole gene pool?

The Allists, with their “Human Nature,” do not speak for humanity.

I mean, they speak, boy, do they speak – but they are not speaking for humanity.

It’s almost the reverse, what they speak for.

But this is the Big Picture: the human gene pool has neurodivergence, which means we always have traits that we can draw upon when the environment changes, active neurotraits and neurotraits in store for what may come, diversity is evolutionary  capital, the more you have, the safer your species is – and Autism is maybe not just one part of it, but it is us trying to name neurodiversity itself with a single label – when the structure is far more clear, simple and true when we say Allism is the label, the individual, discrete thing within the diversity.

I need a metaphor.

It’s like “Autism,” means “not a tree,” and “Allism,” means tree?

I try to say “Autism” is a bush, but no, some Autists are vines, says the community, and it’s sort of fair, fine, we are everything but trees, everything but the tall, strong, can’t see the forest for ‘em trees – so the trees are the thing, the creation, the genetic machines that build themselves out of the gene pool . . . no, I’m sorry, it doesn’t work, really every species of “tree,” created itself out of its previous species’ possibly diverse gene pool, the analogy wouldn’t be “trees,” it would be a single tree species against its genetic backdrop . . . and no easier, no help, we know less about that than about our own backdrop. Let’s try a different tack, go with Jurassic Park, life finds a way.

Is ”Autism,” trying to be a thing? Do Autists select other Autists and seek to outbreed and outlaw other sorts? Not so much, Autism just happens to us and many of us don’t even know about it – but it can’t but help my argument that Allism is the living, genetic thing that it does these things, selects for itself and actively tries to limit the spread of other sorts. On the one hand, it gives us the label – but in many other ways, it wears its label loudly and proudly. They are “just normal,” but rather staunchly so. “Trying to be a thing,” this is a definition for life, for a living thing in evolution – so Allism passes this test and maybe Autism does not?

So why is this hard to say, who am I arguing with? Society knows it is conformist.

We wouldn’t be having this conversation if not for a power differential, if one neurotype didn’t get to declare itself “just normal.” Society knows it is conformist; it just doesn’t know there’s any other way to be. The Allists are apparently everywhere, and they are apparently in charge, so saving anyone or changing the world isn’t about Autistics, or ADHD folks (or POC, or LGBTQIA+), or anyone but them, about their type’s superpowers and disabilities, the rest is . . . I’m sorry, secondary. It wouldn’t matter so much that you’re any sort of challenged, aren’t we all, wouldn’t matter if you were drunk – if you weren’t driving the bus.

Apparently, the only people allowed to drive the bus are the ones who have no idea that they’re disabled.

Hold on, let’s have another restart.

Two weeks later – not happening, what do we say on Twitter, screw it, send. Ha.

Jeff

Oct. 12^th., 2023

Allism, the majority neurotype, is humankind in warrior mode.

A type is a set of options that customizes the human being for particular uses, particular environments, “neurotype,” refers to the customization, the model, perhaps of the brain, and the majority one is by definition, the one that exists for the majority environment. Look at the world, you ought to be able to infer how most people’s minds are working.

It’s conflict – so that’s your neurotype. I’ll point out: authority is conflict, and it’s ubiquitous. Where there isn’t actual fighting, it’s because the conflict is entirely one sided and somebody is doing what they have been bloody well told.

I feel like that should be all caps or something, not delivered Jeff Goldblum deadpan, conflict is everywhere, but you know, you do you.

You know it yourself, you are generally telling everyone about it yourself, your priorities are not a secret. No-one is in a better position to see it and point it out to you than the original non-Allistics, the Autists by which you avoid defining yourselves, we see it starkly, neurotype VS neurotype, where Allistics try to convert Autistics by entirely Allistic methods, army basic training, or simple torture: Allistics pathologize passivity – this should result in more than a discussion of the relative truth of Autistic passivity, it should make clear that the speaker is aggressive, how else would this work?

If it were aggression that were proscribed, then you’d know that the passive were in charge, in the majority.

The Allistic type is aggressive. If the passive were in charge, the aggressive would be singled out for treatment instead, but that’s not the way it is because the majority neurotype is aggressive and so the boys that fight look good and normal to them and the boys that don’t appear to be a problem. This is why in the past, girls and women have been under diagnosed with ASD compared to boys and men, because passivity is less pathological in girls in this society at this time. Own it, this is you. Strength is essential for life, right? This is obvious.

To you.

The opposite has always been true for me, strength has always looked like life’s greatest threat to me. Obvious – but I never knew I had a neurotype, I did not appreciate the purpose built limitations of my own reasoning. Neurotype is a meta concept, it’s not easy, and until I learned about Autism and neurotypes I could not see the way different things can be built-in obvious to different people. I’m saying, I’m certain that most Allistics haven’t imagined this strength orientation to be anything but obvious to every possible mind, it just appears as a universal truth to them, it’s throughout their science, Nature, rough in tooth and claw and all that – again, as my view of strength as a world destroying scourge did and does to me.

The Neurodivergent, we Autistics, the ADHD, the BPD, etc., we are forced to learn a theory of more than one mind, of neurotype, and this information is vital to our navigating the world, we must learn our type and how it differs from “the rest of the world’s,” but the rest of the world never does, they are aggressive and so conformist. They’re in charge and they don’t have to know themselves if they don’t feel like it, and they don’t. But science must move on, with or without them. There is a structure to all this whether they know it or not. The science and the answers are sitting right in front of us all, in plain view, depending on the brain behind your eyes.

Warrior mode explains a lot. Honestly, you (I’m addressing this rant to the Allistic, or more properly to all who share the Allistic view) just call it Human Nature, but the world is not Plato’s metaphor and Natures, essences of things are not how anything works; the “Nature,” doesn’t exist – but the idea, “Human Nature,” this very much does exist, as a rule in the Allistic mind. The fact of this idea’s ubiquity is a hard truth with disastrous consequences for the world. It is a rule that insures we stay in warrior mode, because it is part of warrior mode to get stuck in warrior mode. A warrior with a short attention span or a queasy stomach for it is not effective, a warrior must be stubborn about it, right to the end. So you don’t call it a mode, and you don’t imagine ways that it could anything but the way it is. Warrior mode is all in.

But it is.

There are other modes, the divergent demonstrate this, and they who have ears to hear may infer what they like, draw the connections they see.

Human Nature is not a “Nature,” those aren’t real – so “Human Nature,” is a neurotype, or the concept is part of a neurotype, I want to say an early, basic part of the thinking of the type, that sets the mode: if you believe in a static “Nature,” then you bring a different attitude into life than if you worried that everything you did pushed the people around you in some direction or other. In warrior mode, you don’t worry about personal development, you are dealing in existential matters, and if people changed, you wouldn’t need to be here. In warrior mode, there is only today and tomorrow, there isn’t room for any seven generations.

“Not worrying about personal development,” manifests in half of Allistic speech, here are popular examples:

What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger.

I hit them, but it doesn’t hurt them.

They need to learn about the real world.

People don’t change.

You are not what happened to you, you are your reaction to what happened to you.

If I don’t do it, somebody else will.

You’ll see that many of them are simply direct references to “Human Nature,” or simply rewordings of it, it really does encapsulate the entire suite of thought, even better than Christian Original Sin did, I mean it doesn’t leave anyone out, atheists and scientists can all share it too. It encapsulates and codifies not only the absence of actuarial logic but repeats endlessly that there can be no such thing as actuarial logic. People don’t change.

I have liked to say that it’s when we are, “spanked,” and told that it is not, “bad,” that it does not, “hurt,” us but makes us, “better,” that “we,” must believe or it doesn’t stop, but now I think the ground must be prepared for such basic logic, that indeed I heard it too and remained unconvinced, so that it is perhaps not that “we” are told and convinced, but that we were told and many of you were pre-wired to be convinced. Certainly, I would be surprised to hear of anyone who remembers having a different thought before and changing it.

I mean, I think my actuarial ideas are the same ones I was born with, no-one changed my mind from a previous thought – I’m painting myself into a corner here, I still think the spanking forces a change – just not from as clear a stance as I have, I think maybe the Allistic brain doesn’t have to make the complete one eighty from actuarial operation to Human Nature, I suspect it is born somewhere between and spanking alters the path forward in development, it doesn’t reverse things completely.

Obviously, war is a social matter, an extreme social environment, where in-group and out-group disparities couldn’t be more stark. Social discretion is part of warrior mode.

Ah. I suppose I have assumed that lesson to be part of the spanking too, that when your own brain registers “Ow! That hurts!” and then we are in the scenario at the top of two paragraphs up, trying to make the spanking stop, but our parent is telling us, “This is not bad, this is good, this will make you better,”  then the lesson is to ignore the obvious self-preservation logic of your own brain, ignore the obvious reality that point of hitting is to hurt and instead focus on the social reality of this human telling you that their words are more important than all that reality.

The spanking and the lesson shift you from rationality towards social thinking, away from your own processor towards others – what “Allistic,” means, right.

Theory-wise, it makes some sense for a type to have this capability, and it would seem like a magic power if we could simply turn it on and off by spanking or not, like if we knew that was how it worked, we could turn it on when the aliens attack and turn it off again after, it’s a brilliant genetic option . . . again, assuming war is ever “necessary,” except because of your own selves’ aggression. But as the Davids said, we seem stuck. The soldiers have taken control of the government, so to speak, and they only know one sort of project.

There is indeed an off switch, but you are smarter than Vader’s engineers, you left it off the plans, but this is hope, it is not an ubiquitous Nature that you are this way, and you are only born half so bad, suggesting that within you, long dormant, may yet be that other wolf, the good one.

But this is what Allistic means, warrior mode, which is a sort of hyper ability for conflict / something of a disability to worry about the living, and a hyper sense for social discretion / diminished sense of external realities. It’s not “Human Nature,” these problems, not every “Human,” has them, some have more actuarial sense and less aggression, some see real problems in the world beyond the competitive success of their group – the existence of Autistics and other sensitive sorts proves that everything about the “Human Nature,” in which the Allistic finds us lacking and themselves lamentable but inevitable is really only one neurotype, and one with an off switch at that!

OK, the actuarial disability, the hyper sociality, those are the big two . . . ah. Not the same level of importance maybe, but the language stuff, the empathy and the eye contact, non-verbal “communication.” Here I want to depart sounding smart and scientific, if I ever achieved it, and just say, “non-verbal communication,” is authority, you are simply to obey, what feedback is necessary?

Generally, what was unsaid was only that, “shut up and effing do it.” But also, besides authority, it is otherwise warrior stuff, ninja, green beret stuff, silent running, so no-one knows what you’re up to. Weird to think of the whole population thinking that way, but if you’re all one neurotype, which let’s face it, means mostly common superpowers, but it means that you’re all disabled mostly the same way too.

I mean, sure there’s non-verbal communication, but it’s not non-verbal because that’s the most efficient sort of communication or the sort with the most resolution, I mean it’s not non-verbal, “to communicate,” that you could do out loud. Obviously it’s non-verbal to leave listeners out of the conversation, limit the sharing of the information.

Loose lips sink ships, don’t you know, knowledge is power, because life is war for the warrior.

Jeff

Oct. 5^th., 2023