here you go:

more can be found like this, @chichi__charlie in any good web browser

aww it’s like hardstyle shuffle rave phat pants!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1yCZ_iHPfg

why would future humans bother bringing all these people back

i think it’s worth reminding why doctors treat people now, in this time and space. they do it mostly because they want to save people. maybe a few do it for money, but past a certain point, the money isn’t why you do it. i think it’s a safe bet that doctors of a future would see these corpses as patients, and act accordingly. an analogy - think how we see heart attack victims as patients, and not how our medieval ancestors would have seen them (as corpses)

…literally nothing positive to contribute to the utopian future…

true, but, a good chunk of patients in hopsital today have nothing to contribute to society, and cannot contribute any more, whatsoever. we treat them anyway, because that’s what we do. humans have consistently cared for others that are sick and have “nothing to contribute” throughout history, and that shows no sign of going away anytime soon

nice video, i’m glad i watched through the whole thing. it’s good to understand the perspective

i have a lot of major hangups with the concept, and i don’t see myself aligning anywhere close to these ideas anytime soon, but i think it’s positive to be shown the principles of anarchy from someone who believes them, rather than a strawman version of anarchy by someone who does not

thank you for posting :)

yeah it’s pretty messy

there was an original condition called “autism” which referred to the stereotypical, ““low functioning”” case where someone has intellectual disabilities and the rest

then a ““high functioning”” variant was labelled, where the intellectual disability was missing, called “asperger’s syndrome”

then more and more inbetween cases started being labelled like rett syndrome, CDD, PDD-NOS, and so they had to say “fuck it, it’s all “autism spectrum disorder” now”

over time, “autism” has become shorthand for ASD. to avoid confusion, the OG autism sometimes gets described as “classic autism”

honestly it’s all a big mess

you’re entirely right. allistic is silly. i think it’s slightly worse than silly though. i have two takes on this.

my first take is that you shouldn’t slur people.

my second is that if you’re gonna slur someone anyway, don’t be a chicken; just slur them. hiding behind “allistic” is a little bit like hiding behind “youths”, or “fruity”, or “welfare scroungers”, or “special”, or when people do that thing where they go “…she… oh sorry i mean he” (and vice-versa). it’s either a dogwhistle, or dogwhislte-adjacent. we all know what the speaker is implying when they uses these terms. you’re just slurring someone without the confidence necessary to do so.

this is why i unironically use normie (on the internet). sometimes i want to be rude about it, y’know? am in the wrong to slur like this? yes, absolutely. whilst i might use normie in the context of venting, it still doesn’t make it right. but at least i’m not being a coward about my position by hiding behind “allistic”

sometimes, especially when i’m chatting amongst autistics, it’s easier to casually write “when normies do x it upsets me, how about you?” instead of writing formal prose like “Oh I must say! These dastardly Neurotypicals have a particular behaviour pattern that troubles my mind… Do tell me how you bear the burden of such travesties.”.

doing the formal thing is tiring, and sometimes i don’t want to be the better person. 😎👍

opinion time:

the truth is players don’t lose all the time. companies setup the matches to deliver a 50/50 win loss ratio, because if they didn’t do this, then some players would be losing all the time, these players would uninstall, and then they lose money because they can’t sell boxes or whatever they push these days.

however, humans also experience losses worse than wins. the magnitude of a loss emotion is typically greater than an equivalent win emotion. we evolved like this to make sure you didn’t lose your stash of food in the tree somewhere, or perhaps at the back of the cave - if you did, you died, and so those humans who preserved a sense of dread when experiencing loss were more likely to pass on their genetics. this is why playerbases constantly whinge and moan about being on the losing team - you are actually getting 50/50 win/loss, but your brain only pays attention to the losses, it doesn’t remember the wins as well, and so your perception is distorted.

only in some rare brains is this emotion spread dampened - these rare humans are able to tank losses easily. it still feels bad for them, but they can take the hit way easier. these individuals are typically also the professionals in competitive ventures of all strokes. since society sees them as “elite”, this is now seen as a good thing, even though in rougher times, you can’t expect these people to give more than a cursory fuck about the food supply being lost to bears. it’s one of the reasons why you see elite athletes constantly developing drug problems, catching rape charges, and going bankrupt. the loss just isn’t as emotionally bad for them. they can tank it. it’s not psychopathic, it’s just… they have less aversion to losses.

anyway, if a game is equal, balanced and fair, then an overwhelming majority of the playerbase is experiencing more loss emotion than win emotion, on average. this undercurrent of loss emotion is the true cause of the “violent” part of “violent video games”. it’s not the shooting itself, it’s the competition between players that festers these loss emotions, that then causes the aggression.

boomer legislators get this part mixed up and confused all the time, and so they speak reductively of the problem when they demand less bloodsplatter and gun imagery. what they don’t get, is FIFA, Super Smash Bros, Rocket League etc, can also cause this horrible feeling, because they are competitive games. it’s the competition that does it, not the violence. this is the true origin of toxicity in playerbases. no wonder DotA2 players always have 4000+ hours and say “i hate it, but lets go again”. “just 1 more round” it sounds like drugs, doesn’t it? “just 1 more bump brooo”. “cmonnn, just 1 more”.

solution: stop playing competitive matchmaking. it’s not good for you, it’s not healthy. you are feeding your brain a virtual drug. you are chasing the win, just like a gambler. stop feeding your ego, you don’t need to be good at a game to feel valid. overwhelming chances are you don’t have a “winner-style” competitive brain that will help you cope with loss emotions and truly let you enjoy comp/ranked games, so please stop trying. you’re hurting yourself. “top” rank will never be worth your mental health. you have to let it go.❤️

sources: (loss emotion magnitude in dota2, pdf)[https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7348&context=etd].

(elite athletes found to be arrested far more frequently for DV and SA than non-athletes)[https://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1483&context=honors]

(competitive games, not the “cosmetically violent” games, lead to aggression)[https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2011/08/video-games]

and lastly, my own personal experience dealing with this in 2018. most of this post is anecdotal, it’s an opinion piece, and i don’t care to back this up further.

because an NT literally cannot handle the truth, i.e the actual, literal truth that you just said. they must dig for an implication or inference.

if you tell them, literally, exactly, “i’m going now because i’m exhausted, talk to you next time” an NT will make an inference, or find a hidden implication, because that’s what NT brains do, that’s how NT brains talk.

the inference here is “oh, they’re exhausted by me, and so they don’t like me?? oh noo :(((” when actually, the truth is literally, exactly what you said.

remember, your literal statement runs counter to 99% of their lived NT to NT social interactions, where their inferences do hold true, and if an NT told an NT that “ok, i’m exhausted, i’m going”, that actually implies they don’t like the other NT. you see what i mean?

these differences in language usage can be explained through the double empathy problem, it’s well worth reading into.

so, the tiresome way to explain the truth, every time, is to explain that a) you have autism, b) you can get tired easily by social situations, and c) that it’s not their fault. the problem with this approach is that a lot of NT interactions are “throwaway” interactions. classic example is two people walking on a sidewalk, and you both have dogs. you may or may not have to stop and talk to this person for a throwaway interaction, that will last 2 to 5 minutes, and you do not have time in this interaction to explain points a, b, and c. so, for their sake and yours, it’s time to mask up! 🥸

this is why you can’t “just tell the truth”.

furthe reading into the double empathy problem: Source 1, Source 2, Source 3

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

yep this is exactly the issue. NT people giving advice to brains that can’t use it. it’s all mostly-worthless advice! 😃 it’s good for me to call it out, but better if i offer advice myself, right? practice what you preach

(apologies, this post got out of hand. tl;dr is at the bottom)

if you are someone reading this who is doing the job search, i want to offer some three-part advice around interviews, from an autistic brain who has been down this road before:

★

first part: consider that most interviews are not an assessment of your actual job skills - they are an assessment of your social skills, and they use your level of social skill as a proxy to decide on your job skill. i know that claim sounds ridiculous, but once you think about it, it makes sense, meditate on it for a moment

we will consider the case of applying for a shelf-stacking job. i will be blunt, from a technical standpoint, this job is not hard at all. stock inventory machine says you need to put 3 loaves of bread out? you grab 3 loaves from out back, and put them on the shelf, preferably in reverse order of expiry. customer asks for something? you stop what you’re doing, and go with the customer to their request, no matter what your current task is. one of your colleagues needs help on the cash register? you… get on the cash register. each action in this job has a definitve correct answer, and many wrong ones. you can study these correct answers beforehand

if you’re prepared, it’s not really a job you can fuck up, mostly (don’t worry, he lived). however, here’s the pickle - by the time you get to interview, nearly all candidates have the base technical skills required for that position, since (these days) weaker candidates are filtered out before the interview, for not knowing how the CV ATS keyword game works. only strong candidates who have done the prep work remain

it leaves little room for an interviewer to filter out who should be selected for the job. if we presume the interviewer is also barred from conducting work trials, it leaves the interviewer with nothing else to measure, other than the candidate’s social skills. put simply, if you have two equal candidates, and one of them can talk to customers in a more “NT-style”, then the candidate with the best social skills will be chosen. it’s no wonder then, that at least 85% of adults that are autistic, are unemployed. most of these are also degree holders 👩‍🎓

★

with that context, here’s my second part: i learned this lesson years ago from an older acquaintance who has passed on now. she arrived in the UK after being expelled from her country. this was the second time she had to move to a new land, and her second time arriving in a place where you were judged by who you are

she discovered an environment of “social relegation”, where some employers were quite happy to hire “different”, so long as they were not visible. example: she could work in a kitchen, but not as a server. or she could work in the warehouse, but not the food counter (because people didn’t want “someone like her” handling their food). she could work manufacturing textiles, but not as a sales rep pushing the finished clothes

this is how it was in the 60s/70s in the UK, and it can be boiled down to “no blacks, no dogs, no irish”. i have an irish background myself, and i’ve heard enough stories like this

since she grew up in a less enlightened time, there was no easy fix for her predicament. social change would not come soon enough for her, and after years of being in and out of positions, realised this lesson:

“…you have to be so skilled, and so needed, for the job you are applying for, that they want you before they see you…”

years later, she would find herself a stable position in the NHS (UK healthcare system)

now, i want to be clear. i think that society should adapt to be more inclusive. however, in the context of getting a job, i am being pragmatic about it, and understand that the necessary change wont arrive in time for people like us take advantage of it. i am not defending the status quo, just contextualizing it. i would encourage you to take the lesson she gave me directly to heart

★

with these two contexts, here’s my last part (warning: opinion time): “you’re gonna get clocked, sooner, or later”

if you try, and try, and try, to study how the social dance of interviews work, and wargame scenarios for all outcomes, you will burnout. the depth of social interaction is as vast as space, and you don’t have a warp drive. if you disregard this, and try the path anyway, you may be clocked in your interview as “different”, and will then be left with two outcomes, both are varying degrees of bad

1. you discolse you are autistic. personally, i’ve had no luck with this, and in my opinion, you will give them a perfect reason to “no longer move forward with your application”. illegal? sure. but remember, it’s not the autism, it’s because you’re “just not a good fit” 🥴
2. you do not disclose your autism. if you get clocked, then it’s game over. you will be let go for “being unsociable”, and it won’t be discriminatory to do so because they reasonably didn’t know about your autism

my recommendation? forget about trying to game the social dance of the interview. another analogy, would be if a wheelchair user is faced with a flight of stairs. that’s how damning interviews are to autistic people. you need to find a ramp, lift, or other way to get around this obstacle. you’re not going up those stairs, so you must go around. while interviews should be more inclusive, currently, they are not very inclusive at all. so, we have to work with the hand we are dealt

firstly, you need to reflect on your desired career choice. if it’s a career that has high competition, and is saturated by graduates? honestly? you need to reconsider, because it’s not gonna happen. at interview time, you will be competing against social butterflies and masters of the dance, and you will be trounced if you try to interview for these jobs. even worse, these positions sometimes use group interviews because there are so many candidates, and some candidates will actively step on you to succeed

secondly, research what jobs are in really high demand. we’re talking really, really high demand. the sort of demand that wont go away easily in the next 10 years. you need to look for jobs that are so hot, that they need bodies in seats, and they need them now. if you want an indicator, you should be considering anything in healthcare, technology, or finance (in order of amorality). the demand in these sectors will not go away anytime soon. if you need something more physical to do for work, consider solar panel/wind turbine/AC installation - all of these are going to grow massively because of climate change

thirdly, you need to reflect whether you are the sort of person who could handle a full “in-person” job, or whether remote work is right for you. this is a personal decision, i can’t help with this. each autistic person is different. some thrive by having a rich environment of sights and sounds to engage with, and others (i suspect most, lol) need a workplace that is a quiet box, preferably miles away from colleagues. i know i’m on the “remote” side of this dilemma

once you’ve picked remote or traditional, then take that knowledge back to the list of in-demand jobs, and shortlist some positions that look promising. your final task is to filter this shortlist for positions that you either have the qualifications for, or you can acquire qualifications cheaply for, or can be self-taught. personally, i think self-teaching is going to be your big weapon, and your key advantage over NT candidates. remember, you need to be so good, that the interviewer doesn’t give a damn whether you fumble the social dance

daunting as it is to re-skill for a new career path, you should consider in 5 years time, would you rather be yourself right now (status quo), or be yourself + a bunch of newly learnt skills? you won’t be getting any younger! it’s never too late to re-spec. i think definitely, definitely re-spec for an in-demand job, and by doing so, your interview worries will lessen. the worries never goes away, but you can be reasonably confident that your new, in-demand skillset will carry you over the finish line

★

in summary:

1. it’s no wonder we struggle with interviews, because interviews don’t assess your job skills - they assess your social skills. it’s a trap that they dont teach you! no wonder that 85% of adults that are autistic, are unemployed.
2. to counter this, “…you have to be so skilled, and so needed, for the job you are applying for, that they want you before they see you…”. this is how you can individually mitigate against a biased recruitment process
3. with that in mind, research the highest demand jobs within your reach. find the job sectors that are in so high demand that they willingly look past the social skills, and then re-spec your skillset to match this demand. i’m not saying it’s easy, no. it’s necessary.

good luck, stranger ❤️

ahh you must watch out for the “[fruit] juice” vs “[fruit] juice drink” meme

on the packet somewhere, it will specify, for the example of your case, “apple juice”, or “apple juice drink”

anything that is a “juice drink” is just not the good stuff. a “juice drink” can have basically anything they want in there, with some 0.0001% real fruit to cover themselves legally. always look out for “juice” on it’s own, that’s the 100% real stuff

i say this because i got bitten by buying the cheapest apple “juice” once, to find out it was a “juice drink”, i.e not apple juice.

oh god it’s not just “some people” are influenced, it’s “most people” are influenced?? 💀

it’s no wonder that “influencer” is a job title, yikes!

also, this line made me laugh:

Instead, the autistic shopper focuses on what really matters: ingredients, price, and the necessity of even owning the product. Time and again they select the best product for their needs regardless of how it is displayed.

when they spell out the reasons like this, it’s very funny because it’s written like we’re specimens in a zoo (imagine the david attenborough voice), and that we’re all acting strangely. no, we’re the ones acting rational, you’re the strange ones!

that’s a nice article. glad to see my reasoning validated. thank you for sharing ❤️

get this right, it genuinely shocked me too. some people just… look at the product, and then go “i’ll buy that!” and then they buy it. they are not even making a conscious choice when doing this. their brain intuitively tells them “yes, this one” and they don’t have to think it out.

more often than not, the product that wins is the product with the better or “flashy” packaging and style. that’s one reason why they spend all that money on advertising and branding. to me, it’s sooo strange. why would you not read up on your choice beforehand, or at least investigate each packet to check for food aversions, find out which one is the best $/unit value, etc? why should the packet the food is in, have any substantial bearing on your choice of purchase? (there are edge cases where the packet matters, i know)

to answer your question, yeah there is a lot of risk-takers out there!😱

sure, i get what you mean. but consider this viewpoint. a paraplegic can practise pulling themselves up a stairway by using the handrails. it will work, but it’s not going to be neat, and it will painfully out that individual as disabled either way. or, (jn this analogy) the building owner could install an elevator…

yes, we should do our best to understand the basic social script - but i think society needs to “install more elevators” to make this process easier. there’s a certain point where, no matter how hard we try to learn the social script, we’re still autistic, we’re still going to be outed as “weird”, and that cold truth is just not going away, regardless of how much practice we put in.

personally, i think seriously trying to blend in, is a fools errand. save your energy ❤️

ik ben dom Engels, excuseer. ik ben leren Nederlands. ik vond dit, en ik hoop dat dit is grappig voor je

welcome to the club ❤️

here’s a welcome gift: consider that every bit of advice that you have ever been given in your life, has been given to you in the belief that you are ““normal”” (read: NT, like them), and because most of that advice is not tuned for your autistic brain, most of it is complete trash 😀👍

consider this example: has anyone ever told you to “just read their body language”?

thank you so much for this 🙂 i shall make sure to have soda with food from now on. and also, i can give fanta zero and coke cherry zero a go again (with full stomach) and see what happens lol. appreciate the work 💪

ah okay, i’m way out of my depth then. thanks for the advice

my specific problems are with fanta zero and coke cherry zero. if not the aspartame, then is there a possible cause that isn’t confirmation bias, or caffeine? i don’t have problems with other drinks with caffeine, and i should stress that i drink 2L of water a day regardless of whether i have a can of soda (in addition). i.e, it’s not headaches from dehydration either.

i’m willing to accept the possibility that i am an idiot and it’s just confirmation bias, but if anyone knows any other possible causes, i’d be happy to learn 🙂

another question i have regarding point #2, how much sugar is too much to cause the effects you mention (i.e in one can?). for context, i live in the UK, and most cans of soda are restricted to 16.5g of sugar for the whole can, because of a sugar tax. is 16.5g in one go enough to cause liver damage?

thank you for reading

oh that’s why some soda drinks give me headache 😐 i just realised all the ones that used to make my head hurt, were all zero/diet versions. i switched back to full sugar ones a while back, now i see why i did.

i guess it’s a choice between teeth rot or cancer. i’ll take the teeth rot lol