"gestures & sounds & nonverbal communication is (no tech) AAC. (AAC = augmentative & alternative communication. nonverbal communication = communication without words/language, not communication from nonverbal people)

"texting, writing, posting on social media, all actually accepted versions of AAC."

or thjs very old post from 2023 by assistiveware, an AAC company, creator of proloquo series:

[ID: screenshot of @ AssistiveWare instagram post. post itself is light purple background with dark purple text. bold text read “Social media, texting and tweeting are basically large scale socially accepted AAC systems." below that not bold text say " - Saoirse Tilton, AAC user." at very bottom have AssistiveWare contacts and logo. end ID]

are all things have heard people say when try explain to people who have no idea what AAC is.

is this true? are these AAC? are people who use these thus AAC users?

other AAC users may feel differently, n by no means am dictator of AAC, but as someone who nonverbal full time AAC user, personally really hate this, disagree - or at least disagree w this unnuanced explanation, especially when use with beginners or people who never in their life heard acronym AAC. find it counter productive, even more harm than good.

or, say different, personally: gestures, body language, mouth sounds, drawing, texting, writing, social media, these not AAC by default. in certain situations/context, AAC users may use these as AAC or AAC-adjacent (context-dependent, user-dependent). but saying “all these AAC” without more explain & nuance, false & irresponsible.

because, again, AAC, stand for augmentative and alternative communication. or, put into sentence, typically seen as "non-oral/mouth speech communication that augment (add to) and/or use as alternative to (replace) oral/mouth speech."

(* say "typically" because there people who can't spell thus can't type, who use button-based AAC to replace that. but this typically not what people mainly mean when say "AAC")

but, include & on top of all that, in current world AAC have extra layer of connotation (idea/ feeling/association on top of what it literally mean) of... it not standard. it not typical. it not the norm. it transgressive. people/norm expect something. u giving them another.

for better—me be nonverbal AAC user do make me different than verbal people, do give me different access needs, in world not designed for me. it make me different (unique). n want that difference acknowledged, instead of toxic positivity assimilation "you just the same" out of pity only

or for worse—be treat as second class citizens. oral speech be seen as better than AAC. have communication AAC not listened to or thrown out, which some AAC users have experienced in legal/law/police/abuse report situations. we treated differently (worse).

people whose mouth speak works won't use AAC. AAC is what come next when that not work or may not work.

different (positive). different (neutral). different (negative).

transgressive.

.

people w complex communication needs, n by extension AAC users, we treated horribly by society & by people in society. we get teased, bullied, ignored, abused, abused & not able communicate it, but we not just get mistreated on individual-level. often we denied right to communicate, right to education, n other human rights. many of us forced to live in silence, because we not given communication tools, or support for develop communication. sometimes police, testimonies, & official legal records not see our AAC communication as real communication.

our non-oral speech communication get seen as less legit than oral speech. other people’s oral speech get automatic listened to before our own. we denied communication tools that may help us thrive because people around us want us to speak orally & think any other tool will take away our hypothetical chance to talk fluently reliably via mouth.

everyone communicate in variety of ways. body language on purpose, body language not on purpose, gestures, pointing, vocal sounds, drawing, writing, texting, via showing pictures. for most verbal people, these communication are normalized. no one bat an eye when person giving speech use body language persuade audience, or when you show friend picture of your lunch when you struggling explain it. but us, who can’t fully rely on oral speech, we need rely on these more. heavier. more intentionally. more on purpose. but ours gets dismissed. gets ignored on purpose.

so, really do understand trying to reframe AAC to people who not know what it is, or people resistant to it. that we all use it. that they use it. that they listen to other verbal people who using it. so ours should be listened to, too.

but that’s the thing: everyone communicate in variety of ways. n for most verbal people, those are normalized.

make text post in social media where expect text post norm is text post suppose to write text (may even not have audio option), and, use non-mouth speak communication (or not use mouth speak) in person when all people mouth talk all expect you mouth talk. fundamentally different.

second thing get you ableism. get make fun & mock at best, in conversation get ignored at best. at worst, get hate crimed, get killed, get wrong convicted, or in medical situation see as justify for not need consent or reason ignore what you say or reason declare incompetent.

first thing. well, who get be on social media full of privilege & discrimination, who get heard on social media full of that, who get bully & make fun of for writing "wrong" for content full of that (race, class, dis/ability, etc). but, struggle think of time where act of make text post on social media where expect post text post is.. that.

there difference between writing text post in tumblr or any text-based social media, or text fun friend group where you all miles apart n all texting, vs texting in group chat when sit irl with friend group who all orally talking, different, or person using letter board to spell out everything they want to say.

there difference between showing your friend picture of your dinner when it too complicated to explain n clearer in picture when you bump into eachother n start mouth chatting, vs using symbol based communication in high tech speech generating device or low tech picture cards, or even AAC user having unique relationship with art n see that as way of communicate.

maybe in another world or in future, second group get as normalized as first. but we not there. and AAC users who use most basic, fundamental, narrowest definition of AAC, we exist right now in real life, we not theory or theoretical.

in average face to face situation, even verbal person use more nonverbal communication than verbal ones.

are all communication that not oral speech, AAC?

trying to normalize AAC, but end up erasing our differences (differences can be factual. neutral.), assimilating us, turning a word that have specific meanings for us into something so wide, it useless to those of us who most impacted, those of us who need it.

there better way to explain we all use things other than oral/mouth speech to communicate than “they *are* AAC” for everyone, in every situation. (n yes, people DO say that)

if anyone with similar feelings with simpler way put it, please do. it too complex n abstract in brain, n not have scripts or “table of contents” in brain that already exist for it, so feel like wrote bunch of confusing nothing.

[rewrite of old post for AAC awareness month. so parts that sound bit different, that why (copy paste).]

reading comprehension question just in case:

choose one that summarize what OP think

a) gestures/sounds/insert list NOT AAC NEVER AAC

b) gestures/sounds/insert list can be use as AAC/adjacent for AAC users & complex communicators but they not inherently AAC

c) gestures/sounds/insert list are AAC

idk when we decided that explaining yourself shouldn't be part of an apology but like. if someone was a dick to me and apologizes but I still don't understand why they did it I'm not gonna feel any better

"Sorry for hurting your feelings earlier. I was trying to say x, but I guess it came across wrong. I don't think you're stupid."

or

"Sorry I snapped at you. I didn't get enough sleep last night so my patience is a little low today."

is a better apology than

"I want you to know that I am sorry that my actions offended you. I take full accountability for my actions and I am listening and learning. I hear you."

People have started to equate explanation with excuse when they are NOT the same. You aren't excusing your actions if you explain them. "Hi I'm sorry I was so snappy earlier, I didn't get enough sleep last night but that's not on you and I'm going to be a little more careful with my tone" is very different from "You can't be mad at me because there was a good reason I was rude"

an apology that is not followed by doing better, as I have repeatedly been told, is insincere meaningless noise

an apology that is not accompanied by an explanation of what one did wrong and how one will do better, therefore, is a signal that one doesn't know what one did wrong or how one will do better

(or at least that's how I understand it, which is why I've basically given up apologizing: I cannot apologize sincerely without understanding what I did wrong—which a lot of the time I don't, because I have no idea what's going on in the other person's head, and trying to figure it out by myself will not magically grant me either that understanding or any awareness of whatever social cue I missed—so if explaining my perspective gets me accused of making excuses, then there is absolutely no point my bothering to say words we both know would be insincere.)

(why yes, I do think allistic people generally should put as much conscious effort into social interactions with autistic people as allistic-tuned social rules demand autistic people put into those same social interactions, why do you ask?)

I've been learning to drive, and with my instructor I have repeatedly run into the same situation:

Like... I was not saying that I think I was RIGHT. I was saying WHAT HAPPENED. Jesus fucking christtttttt

Being on the spectrum and also a technical writer is a special kind of aggravating because like 50% of all discussions and thinkpieces by neurodivergent authors about What Neurotypicals Really Mean begin with the unexamined assumption that there exists a single objectively correct interpretation of any given communicative act, which can be derived independently of the act's context and unmediated by any cultural lens, and that communication difficulties arise because some people are inherently capable of perceiving this meaning and some people inherently are not. Like, buddy, pal, my dude, I implore you to think carefully about what it would imply if this were actually true.

if someone intellectual disability say go away say shut up say hate and say things that little bit rude need need need understand . communication not at all easy .

when get frustrate when get overwhelm all can think is that want stop conversation right now . not actually mean hate not mean try attack . not even mean that will not talk again later .

just means right now need things stop and not know what else do , overwhelm and meltdown brain can not just think all good logic good language . sometimes not even enough logic know should step away , or how do that .

sorry did not step away . was tired frustrate and first thing see in morning . will try do better ignore if someone make frustrate .

There’s a popular post going around that’s like “well tone indicators are helpful for people for anxiety because some people need stuff like “ /nm (not mad)” or “ /nbh (nobody here)” and I absolutely get it because I have an anxiety disorder but like. You can very much add that on the text of a message itself and it will be way more clear and accessible than expecting them to memorize this whole new fabricated code. 

Which one do you think will be clearer, faster to understand, and more direct to the point:

or

You can be mindful of someone else’s needs and talk to them in a way that is respectful and understanding of those needs. The key is communication. Expecting people to memorize a lot of abbreviations is like the contrary of accessible.

I still haven’t seen these tone indicator abbreviations in the wild, but it certainly doesn’t help that every time I see examples like this on tumblr, the abbreviation has a different, well-established meaning!

Like in this example, if someone said to me “have you done the dishes? /nm” I would read it as “Have you done the dishes? Nevermind.” Which is either absent-minded or passive-aggressive. It would never occur to me that it could mean “not mad”!

The best, though, is /pos, which supposedly means “positive” but is already well-established as meaning “piece of shit.” Like. If someone used that one on me that would be a very mixed-message.

For the love of all that’s holy, please stop trying to add yet another set of social rules I have to figure out and memorize; it is hard enough already. Just say the actual words that you mean instead of making me guess which of all possible meanings you intended with your abbreviations. If you mean that you are not mad, say that you are not mad. If you want communication to be clearer, then make it clearer; don’t add another layer of obfuscation. You are not actually making life easier for anyone outside of your secret code words club; if anything you are making it harder, and making communication worse.

This is one of the worst takes I’ve read in recent memory and the fact that it has more than fifty thousand notes makes me viscerally upset. This is from a position of such contempt and ignorance that it genuinely makes me wonder if it’s in good faith; this reads like a fucking psyop.

Let’s take on the first point, shall we? And let’s get it from someone with an actual communication disorder, who actually needs and uses tone indicators to effectively communicate in an IM setting. Okay, the first point here is the idea that you can communicate your emotions without using a tone indicator. This is such an openly stupid point that I’m probably about to spend most of this post dunking on it in multiple different ways, so let’s start small.

1: Reducing the amount of words you need to say to communicate a meaning has literally always been a fundamental aspect of internet slang. You want to be angry about tone indicators being short forms for things that would take much longer to communicate when written out fully? I better see you demanding that people stop saying “lmao” or using “:)” in casual conversation as well, because “I’m laughing my ass off” and “I’m smiling” communicate the same thing without you having to “memorize a whole set of abbreviations”. The fact that anyone could look at this argument and unironically not make this connection is astounding, and is half of what makes me wonder if this post is, like, actually good-faith criticism.

2: More importantly, neither of the alternatives to tone indicators offered in the first post are perfectly clear or certain, and their added density could just be more confusing to people with autism, communication disorders, et cetera. I know that I, personally, would take longer to recognize the second option in each example, and would be less certain about it when I did. The point of using tone indicators is an inherent assumption that they are always true, that you aren’t masking anything or putting any hidden meaning behind what you’re saying. The expectation is that they are used completely to represent their original meaning, every time, all the time, something that can’t be said for just saying things in English.

3: MOST importantly, tone indicators serve a dual purpose, a point that is so open and obvious I’m again astounded any of the OPs couldn’t catch it with a cursory glance at how they work. I’m glad that you can effectively and politely communicate how you feel in a textual sentence, but some people can’t. Tone indicators don’t just exist for the reader, people who struggle to process emotion in text, that’s only half their purpose. They also exist for people who struggle to communicate in text, and benefit from an effective shorthand to describe their feelings instead of having to word it right.

Just give autistic people one fucking thing. Just give people with communication disorders an effective and clear shorthand. Stop making this about yourself, and your struggles to keep up with changing times because you need to “learn new social rules”. Social rules change; I don’t care if you’re used to the old, ableist ones, because they’re actively harmful to me and people that I care about. Either learn the new ones, or continue being ableist.

Not a single line is spent in this post, by anyone in it, considering how tone indicators assist the people who need them. This is three people who don’t need tone indicators complaining about how tone indicators are inconvenient to them, and learning new vocabulary is too difficult. This post rests on the inherent assumption that allowing people who struggle to communicate to communicate more effectively is not worth the effort it would take to learn around a dozen or so common abbreviations, which is openly ableist garbage. I really hope the people who made this and everyone who liked or reblogged it positively can look at themselves and wonder why they consider that mild inconvenience to be so much trouble that it isn’t worth giving people like me a way to communicate their emotions to other people over the internet.

Fifty thousand notes.

Fuck this.

Abbreviations have been part of internet speak for a long time, and they’ve lead to confusion and complaints for just as long. Which doesn’t mean they’re bad, but it does make them unreliable as a disability accommodation. That’s what makes this specifically an issue in situations where people expect them to reliably clarify an otherwise ambiguous statement, rather than other situations. Especially in cases where they overlap with better-established acronyms, which is not an issue with “lmao” or “:)”.

The expectation that tone indicators will always be used accurately is unrealistic. Once a signal of non-confrontation gains enough prominence, it will eventually become an expectation, and start being faked for the sake of politeness. I’m sure there have already been instances of people using “/nm” out of a desire to not appear mad despite actually being mad. And, of course, there’s always the risk of people misusing the tone indicators by accident.

These are inevitable concerns with all forms of communication. Tone indicators are not a way out of them.

The wording doesn’t have to be any more complicated. You can literally just take whatever words the tone indicators have shortened and write them in parentheses. Replace “/nm” with “(not mad)”, replace “/hj” with “(half-joking)”, replace “/nbh” with “(nobody here)”, etc. It takes slightly longer to type, but the meaning to both writer and reader is exactly the same, and you will have better odds of getting your intended meaning across. There are people who have more practice with using the tone indicators, but there is nothing that makes them inherently easier to process or communicate with.

Relying on unclear language and overly complicated social rules also hurts autistic people and people with communication disorders. I’m autistic and I’ve reblogged this post earlier in its chain - the comment pointing out overlapping abbreviations is a reblog from me. I’d be willing to bet that many, many other people who’ve reblogged this post to express frustrations with tone indicators are also autistic and/or have other communication difficulties.

These is such a thing as competing access needs, where an accommodation needed for one group of people makes something inaccessible for others. In those cases, there is no universal answer, and each group must accept that there will be situations tailored for the other group instead.

If tone indicators did not have a viable alternative, they would fall under competing access needs. But as far as I can tell, there is in fact no conflict, and we can use alternatives to meet the needs of both groups.

The previous comments examine the ways tone indicators are expected to assist communication, point out ways they are ineffective in doing so, and start a conversation about alternatives. You dismiss the concerns raised as mild inconveniences, and assume that people could easily overcome them with a bit of effort. That’s far from an example of fighting ableism.

Anyway as long as I’m yammering: I think vanilla sex would honestly benefit from adopting the green/yellow/red safeword convention used in kink. Like, the idea is that kink needs it because they’re doing kinky things, but a lot of it’s just, like, “is this new thing okay?” “do you want to keep going?” “is this too much too fast?” which is pretty relevant anytime. To someone with very little sexual experience, just doing sex stuff at all is as dicey a proposition as kinky stuff is for others, so I think this would be a welcome convention.

What makes safewords clever is that they recognize that sexual encounters happen within a distinct “space” and set up interrupts that explicitly lie outside that space and can’t possibly be mistaken for anything within it. This cleanly sidesteps a lot of the communication and deniability issues people talk about.

What I think gets in the way of this is the obsession with naturalistic, intuitive sex. Safewords are super constructed and artificial-feeling, and while kink and especially BDSM has to accept that as inevitable since the artificiality is essential to what it is, I feel like there’s this conception from the vanilla direction that the artificiality itself cheapens sex somehow. All the ideals of good vanilla sex are built around spontaneity, intuition, and natural bonding, which means that explicit safety systems or barriers between the social and sexual domains are emblematic of “deficient” sexual chemistry or technique. To continue the analogy above, the idea of having or needing a discrete “sexual space” is considered undesirable in vanilla. This attitude is a problem even in kink, but kink is naturally stigmatized and deals with some serious shit even by sexual standards, so they did at least come up with good solutions even if they aren’t always applied wisely.

Among my friends and I, we use safewords entirely outside of kink or sexual contexts. We use them in like, social situations and whatnot. It’s just a good communication tool for people who struggle with being assertive and saying no. Also as an ND person the whole culture around communication in vanilla spaces is just fucking atrocious, like, they want you to guess? based on body language or some nebulous hints? whether you have interest or consent? What the fuck why would you structure any sort of communication that way at all that’s horrid

this need for clear, explicit communication is what drove me toward the kink community in the first place. No one can ‘guess’ what i want or what works for me.

I love the stop-light system.

So… you know how when kids are playing, especially tickling or rough-housing, a lot of the time they yell and laugh and scream and might yell NOOOO but then jump at you and tickle more?

When @mistresskabooms was little, we both talked to her and her step-sibling about clear communication (so not saying “no” if what you meant was “yes” and vice versa), and we also came up with a Stop Right Now phrase. This was as much for us as for her, which, like, if you’ve ever been around an amped-up 5yo who wants to tickle you, you understand.

If anybody said “pink elephants,” it was time to stop whatever you were doing, immediately, and check to make sure everybody is okay. This made the phrase also useful for a kid getting lost or hurt on a playground: if everyone knows that “pink elephants” means stop and check in on everyone, that means if you fall and need help, you can yell something really distinct that can be picked up in the hubub of a busy playground. You could only start playing again if everyone said “yes I want to play more.”

It became so ingrained in her that when she was eight or so, we took her for her annual physical and part of that physical made her uncomfortable, so she sat up and said “Pink elephants!” to the doctor. I was really proud of her for voicing her boundaries around discomfort with having her body touched, which I reinforced with her while explaining to the doctor what was going on. She agreed to finish the exam after we talked through why it was necessary for the doctor to gently press on her stomach and how much more it was going to take to be done.

The doc thought it was odd at first that we taught our kid how to set up a safe word/phrase, but once I pointed out that like… kids yell a lot when they play and this let MK clearly communicate (and US clearly communicate) when we needed to stop, he thought it was pretty cool.

The stoplight system is also really prevalent in TTRPG spaces; I’ve written instructions on how to use it for at least 3 different books, and I’ll shove it into every book I can. We use it on our game and it really really helps when you’re in stressful or emotionally intense scenes - I really feel like we can do more emotionally intense RP safely because everyone has those tools.

Kink-modeled communication is really useful in lots of circumstances.

tips for talking (that only kind of suck)

if there’s anything 2020 but also the past four years have taught us as a nation, it’s that a shitton of you fuckers don’t know how to communicate, don’t know how to moderate debates, and don’t know how to listen. so fuck it, here’s a crapshoot guide on how to facilitate effective dialogue and communicate with authenticity and respect

Rules for Talking to Other Humans, or, How to Have Hard Conversations, Discussions, and Debates in School and in Life

1. Don’t interrupt. 

You’re already emotionally volatile in these situations a lot of the time. Interrupting the other person because you’re offended, or you don’t get it, or you want to argue - that’s not dialogue. This is not the time for diatribe or rants. These conversations, discussions, and debates aren’t about finding out what’s right or wrong, or good or bad. They’re about gaining a deeper understanding of the issue/subject at hand. So let’s try to avoid situations where Kamala has to put her hand up and say “Excuse me, I’m talking.”

2. Acknowledge your limits.

You don’t know everything. Seriously. And if you think you do, check yourself before you wreck yourself. If after that you still think you know everything, shut up and fuck off, because you’re not ready for this. You could be a professional diplomat and you would still need to acknowledge both to yourself and others that you have limits, so-called blindspots, that mean you won’t ever understand everything that someone else has lived through. This may be an issue of privilege or just of basic difference, but you need to understand that you and the person/people you’re talking to are not the same, don’t all think the same, and haven’t lived the same lives. So just be prepared to be wrong and to apologize. 

3. Don’t enter peace talks if you’re a warmonger. 

Some people start conversations to ignite arguments so that they can win and feel powerful and big. Don’t be this person. Don’t go in with your fists up. Don’t go in trying to make a point or make an example. This isn’t a fight. This isn’t war. It’s conversation, discussion, debate. The point is to learn and grow. Not win.

4. Listen as much (if not more) than you speak. 

You’ll never know if you don’t go, you’ll never shine if you don’t glow, and you’ll never learn if you don’t listen. Rich discussion comes from intentional listening. Spending the time when others are talking coming up with your next winning argument is pointless unless you’re in a courtroom. Don’t be an asshole. Listen hard and don’t monologue your way out of having to face the weaknesses of your arguments or positions. 

5. Questions are better than answers. 

If you come up with solid, for-sure answers, you probably didn’t have a very productive discussion or conversation. You’re not solving problems overnight (aka Rome wasn’t built in a day). You’re opening doors. If you have more questions than answers when you walk away, you have momentum to learn, grow, change, and make change.

6. Don’t play favorites.

Not all points of view are equally valid (as in, climate-denier arguments should not carry the same weight as the advice of climate scientists, for instance), but there are many roads to the same destination. You can be in favor of a particular direction or solution, but hearing other options can help you come up with even better ideas TOGETHER.

7. Don’t play devil’s advocate (and don’t let others do it either).

Nobody likes the asshole who says “do homeless people even deserve to sleep on benches” or “well just playing devil’s advocate, why should gay people have rights.” Approach reality, not what ifs and fantasies. You can’t have a productive or rich conversation with someone who doesn’t even see your issue as an issue. And even if they agree, playing devil’s advocate is bad faith. It’s not real. It’s a stalling tactic, and it’s a way for people to test the waters if they have a controversial opinion. 

And if you are trying to have a hard conversation with someone whose beliefs, opinions, or understanding of reality are different than yours, you need to set those boundaries before the conversation even starts. No devil’s advocates. No bad faith arguments. Listening. Understanding. Empathy. 

8. Assume benevolence.

Don’t assume the worst about people. Sometimes ignorance feels like hatred when in reality it’s just a refusal or even inability to think deeply. Give people the benefit of the doubt if you can’t know better. 

9. Shut down malevolence. 

DON’T let people walk all over you. You don’t have to compromise your beliefs. You certainly don’t have to keep talking to someone once you know they don’t intend on taking you seriously. You have the right to shut down bullshit, which includes but is not limited to playing devil’s advocate, dehumanization, patronizing, bigotry. 

10. Get comfortable with being uncomfortable.

You’re probably not going to have all the answers. Having hard conversations can be HARD, can affect relationships (end them even), and leave you feeling worse after than you did before. But discomfort leads to exploration and new paths forward. Sitting in discomfort with the lack of resolution of your problems is the only way to break down the walls. If we aren’t willing to be uncomfortable, then we’re not willing to do the work to be better.

I’m????

Oh my God this actually explains so much.

So there’s a known thing in the study of human psychology/sociology/what-have-you where men are known to, on average, rely entirely on their female romantic partner for emotional support. Bonding with other men is done at a more superficial level involving fun group activities and conversations about general subjects but rarely involves actually leaning on other men or being really honest about emotional problems. Men use alcohol to be able to lower their inhibitions enough to expose themselves emotionally to other men, but if you can’t get emotional support unless you’re drunk, you have a problem.

So men need to have a woman in their lives to have anyone they can share their emotional needs and vulnerabilities with. However, since women are not socialized to fear sharing these things, women’s friendships with other women are heavily based on emotional support. If you can’t lean on her when you’re weak, she’s not your friend. To women, what friendship is is someone who listens to all your problems and keeps you company.

So this disconnect men are suffering from is that they think that only a person who is having sex with you will share their emotions and expect support. That’s what a romantic partner does. But women think that’s what a friend does. So women do it for their romantic partners and their friends and expect a male friend to do it for them the same as a female friend would. This fools the male friend into thinking there must be something romantic there when there is not.

This here is an example of patriarchy hurting everyone. Women have a much healthier approach to emotional support – they don’t die when widowed at nearly the rate that widowers die and they don’t suffer emotionally from divorce nearly as much even though they suffer much more financially, and this is because women don’t put all their emotional needs on one person. Women have a support network of other women. But men are trained to never share their emotions except with their wife or girlfriend, because that isn’t manly. So when she dies or leaves them, they have no one to turn to to help with the grief, causing higher rates of death, depression, alcoholism and general awfulness upon losing a romantic partner. 

So men suffer terribly from being trained in this way. But women suffer in that they can’t reach out to male friends for basic friendship. I am not sure any man can comprehend how heartbreaking it is to realize that a guy you thought was your friend was really just trying to get into your pants. Friendship is real. It’s emotional, it’s important to us. We lean on our friends. Knowing that your friend was secretly seething with resentment when you were opening up to him and sharing your problems because he felt like he shouldn’t have to do that kind of emotional work for anyone not having sex with him, and he felt used by you for that reason, is horrible. And the fact that men can’t share emotional needs with other men means that lots of men who can’t get a girlfriend end up turning into horrible misogynistic people who think the world owes them the love of a woman, like it’s a commodity… because no one will die without sex. Masturbation exists. But people will die or suffer deep emotional trauma from having no one they can lean on emotionally. And men who are suffering deep emotional trauma, and have been trained to channel their personal trauma into rage because they can’t share it, become mass shooters, or rapists, or simply horrible misogynists.

The only way to fix this is to teach boys it’s okay to love your friends. It’s okay to share your needs and your problems with your friends. It’s okay to lean on your friends, to hug your friends, to be weak with your friends. Only if this is okay for boys to do with their male friends can this problem be resolved… so men, this one’s on you. Women can’t fix this for you; you don’t listen to us about matters of what it means to be a man. Fix your own shit and teach your brothers and sons and friends that this is okay, or everyone suffers.

The next time a guy says, “What? You don't want to be my friend?” I’ll text him this and then ask if he really wants to be friends or just have another potential girlfriend.

y’all I am living for these analyses where the new way to fight the patriarchy is to teach men to love each other and themselves

Im a communication student and can confirm the above is absolutely 100% accurate and it’s called agentic vs communal friendship theorized by Steven McCornack

When your boyfriend or girlfriend asks if you are okay..

Don’t lie to them. If y'all are in love, tell them what’s bothering you. They care. It’s okay to be vulnerable with them. Don’t tell them “yes, I’m okay” and you’re not, because then you’ll be mad at them for not understanding your hurt when YOU HAVEN’T EVEN EXPLAINED IT to them. People can’t read minds. Give them the chance to listen, give them the chance to understand. Let them love you, communication is key.

Also, it’s okay to say what you are feeling, even when your feelings aren’t pretty or fair. It’s ok to say “I know it’s not fair of me, but when you did this thing, I felt x way, even though I know that’s not what you meant.”

For example, “I know you had a good reason for canceling on me, but it was still very hurtful to me, because I was looking forward to it. I know you didn’t mean it that way, but it made me feel like I’m not important to you.”

Please please please. Always communicate. If it hurts you, tell them. Even if you know it’s unfair. Tell them that! If your significant other tells you something and you don’t know how to respond, please don’t stay silent either. If you don’t know what to say, tell them! It saves so many nerves if you let them know “I’m not sure what to say” instead of ignoring them. It may not be what they’re looking for but it is far better than nothing and it shows you are still giving effort. If you can’t trust someone you’re dating enough to have honest and open communication with them, either your relationship is very new or you may not be in the healthiest relationship.

To my friends on the spectrum, let me explain to you an unspoken social rule that possibly nobody has ever explained to you before

If a neurotypical asks you, “What game are you playing?” they’re not asking you to describe the game.

They’re asking you if they can play too.

I didn’t realize, even thought it took me almost three decades to learn this, that this was such a paradigm changing realization until we had our conversation today.

But it really really is. One of the most bewildering realizations I’ve had is most people don’t talk to learn things unless its related to work or directly towards their own hobbies, all the words and questions are bonding questions if done socially. They are “lets make friends” questions.

So if I answer their question without an opportunity for the person asking the question to give a response or to join in somehow, the asker feels alienated and starts shutting down.

Example: what are you reading?

True answer but not what they’re looking for: Title of book

Best answer for social scenarios where I want to retain/create friendship: This book is about x and y but it has z that i know u have an interest in too.

Example: what are you doing?

True answer but not: drawing

Best answer for friends: I’m drawing but would u like company while I’m working?

And sometimes frankly I’m not in a headspace where I can process people so the answer is something like, “I would like to do something in a day or later, do you want to plan something?”

Tldr: communication is wierd

HOLY

SHIT

that explains so fucking much thank you

(why the fuck do neurotypicals never just day what they mean ie hey this show looks cool mind if I join you)

Further annoying?

They don’t realize that’s what they’re asking and they just feel rejected and go away. So you can’t even ask them what you did wrong because they can’t even put a finger on why they feel the way they do they just know you made them feel bad for some undefined reason.

what? this makes no sense to me.

cause like, if someone is doing an activity and I ask “what are you doing?” I usually am looking for an explanation and if I want to join then I ask if I may.

why would someone make it more complicated?

Scientists taught 23 riding horses of various breeds to look at a display board with three icons, representing wearing or not wearing a blanket. Horses could choose between a “no change” symbol or symbols for “blanket on” or “blanket off.” Previously, their owners made this decision for them. Horses are adept at learning and following signals people give them, and it took these equines an average of 10 days to learn to approach and touch the board and to understand the meaning of the symbols. All 23 horses learned the entire task within 14 days. They were then tested in various weather conditions to see whether they could use the board to tell their trainers about their blanket preferences. The scientists report online in Applied Animal Behaviour Science that the horses did not touch the symbols randomly, but made their choices based on the weather. If it was wet, cold, and windy, they touched the “blanket on” icon; horses that were already wearing a blanket nosed the “no change” image. But when the weather was sunny, the animals touched the “blanket off” symbol; those that weren’t blanketed pressed the “no change” icon. The study’s strong results show that the horses understood the consequences of their choices, say the scientists, who hope that other researchers will use their method to ask horses more questions.

i love everything about this but especially the last sentence

THIS IS GOOD SHIT

HUMANITY IS FINALLY USING OUR PROPENSITY FOR COMMUNICATION TO TRY AND LEARN HOW TO COMMUNICATE WITH OTHER SPECIES ON OUR OWN FUCKING PLANET

ABOUT FUCKING TIME

you know how in fanart and cartoons and very much in visual media there’s this visual trope of one person kissing another and that second one being surprised/distressed by the kiss and basically having ().() eyes while the other one is ^.^

and how the alternative to that is a simple algorythm of ‘lean in, wait for partner to either draw back or also lean in’ that just adds momentary non-verbal but absolutely obvious and uncontested consent to the picture?

non-verbal consent is so simple but our culture discounts it so much

for real though, internet english is STAGGERINGLY multi-modal. the problem with communicating via writing is that you lose certain dimensions of spoken conversation, like intonation, facial expression, body language, pauses and fillers etc, but there’s been so many linguistic innovations to maintain richness in communication, like

like i could go ON and ON about the things that internet language users have created to get around the difficulties of non-verbal communication, like ??? what other dialects can do all that and change that much in 30 years????

and of course as soon as communication becomes more emotion-communicating and intuitive, there starts the stress of "WAIT DID I PUT THAT RIGHT OR WILL THEY THINK I'M NOT SERIOUS ENOUGH OR TOO SERIOUS SHIT DID I OFFEND THEM WITH THAT COMMA" of social anxiety. Thanks, internet dialect.

(I love this shit so much)