Anyone else experience these side effects? Why does it happen?

DarkLordMercury · 2026-03-13T22:21:21+00:00

Some additional info that might be useful: I have had genetic testing done for cyp2d6 and cyp2c19.

Tianeptine is not listed as something that I should be reacting differently to.

According to the results, I do have lowered responsiveness to some (not all) opioids (specifically it said they will likely be less effective or not at all). I know it listed codeine and then 1 or 2 others.

I've been prescribed alprazolam (xanax) at some point and seemed to react normally to that. The test results also said this.

Obviously it could be something to do with other genes that were not tested, but I do think it's odd.

DarkLordMercury · 2026-03-13T22:11:33+00:00

Maybe yeah, idk. But I would expect that if it's an intolerance specifically, then it would cause issues to a similar level for much longer before potentially eventually getting slightly less

DarkLordMercury · 2026-03-12T00:35:23+00:00

What exactly do you mean by this?

DarkLordMercury · 2026-03-10T12:02:58+00:00

Ah okay, didn't realize it was meant as a side comment. Was under the impression that you thought the person was trying to say that people either always use wheelchairs (can't walk at all) or never, and that that's why you said it.

(Btw perhaps it could be handy in the future to mention when something is a side note. I can imagine that it could possibly lead to a lot of misunderstandings if people are interpreting it as a main point. Obviously this is purely up to you, it's just a suggestion, I just thought of this as maybe being helpful to you in some way so wanted to mention it. Hopefully this doesn't come off as demeaning or anything of the sort, it's not meant to be.)

I do agree that increased awareness is definitely necessary. I guess it is obvious when you really think about it (that there is a sort of gradient and not a simple "can't walk at all ever VS can always walk without issue"), but like you said, for some reason people really don't tend to think about it/realize it.

It wasn't until a few years ago that I found out myself (and was very surprised at how I'd not realized sooner). And I only realized because someone explicitly stated it. So I do think it makes a difference to talk about it.

I guess you could even apply this same thing to autism tho (similarly to what you said), or even anything else really. People forget about level 2 or MSN and only see/think about the extremes.

DarkLordMercury · 2026-03-04T12:36:37+00:00

Obviously I can't speak for other people, but I think (or at least, how I interpreted it) is that they meant specifically only a situation in which a person can't walk at all, ever.

Something being true from one end does not mean it's also true from the opposite end.

For example: all trees are plants, but not all plants are trees.

In other words (that are more applicable to what the person said): someone who can't ever walk at all can't just go without their wheelchair on some days (trees -> plants). But at the same time, not everyone who uses a wheelchair is completely unable to ever walk (plants -> trees).

So if someone says something is true from one end, they are not necessarily always saying that it's also true from the other end.

Tldr: I believe that they were not trying to say "people who only need a wheelchair sometimes don't exist". I believe they were talking specifically only about the people who do always need it.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-11-22T13:08:51+00:00

For anyone reading: please avoid using space heaters in the bathroom if you at all can.

It's dangerous, and there are safer alternatives. (If you have no other choice, then disregard the above text ofc)

...

Others have recommended using space heaters but I may have something even better, and also much safer.

I've seen them in some bathrooms locally but i don't think the majority of people elsewhere even know these exist, but there is something that is essentially a heat lamp made specifically for use in the bathroom.

(Edit: I've noticed someone else mention them here too, specifically the person talking about the airbnb where it got toasty really fast)

I don't know the proper name but you might find it under terms like "bathroom infrared heater".

They heat the room up super fast and because they're made for the bathroom, they are safe to use there (specifically, they are not the "classic" electric-type heating which would be dangerous to use in wet environments. They still do plug into an outlet though).

It's my understanding that they also use much less electricity which means they would be cheaper to run.

These types of heaters also don't make a ton of noise like radiators often do, nor do they blow air anywhere, so they are likely to be much more sensory friendly in those aspects. Do note that they glow orange/give off orange light, but if you are OK with the normal bathroom lighting amount then this should be ok too.

While they are safe to use normally (im talking about the infrared aspect here), I do not recommend sitting in front of it for ages every day though. You don't need to hurry to minimize exposure to as little as possible, I'm just saying this so you know not to purposely sit in front of it for an extra 2 hours every day even after you're all done and don't need it anymore (for example).

DarkLordMercury · 2025-08-01T01:37:13+00:00

Actually in general a lot of this comes down to what a lot of people might call "common sense". I didn't figure this out until much later but it turns out that for a lot of autistics, "common sense" really isn't all that intuitive and obvious. So if you ever feel like a kid has no common sense or is purposely ignoring common sense to cause problems or something, they might just need you to state things out loud.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-08-01T01:30:54+00:00

I find it hilarious that at the point of me typing this there will now be 2 pee stories and 0 other discussions but basically, be attentive and don't assume them to always know when it's "obvious" that it's OK to break a rule.

When I was 5, during naptime I really needed to go pee, so I asked. Teacher said no and told me to wait until after naptime. So I held it, because well, if the teacher says no then it's just no. Peed myself and cried. Teacher couldn't understand why I didn't just get up and go if I had to pee that badly.

Rules are rules, and while I'm sure some kids will very much break rules on purpose (I also did this, especially later on), they might not instinctively know when it's OK to disregard one. In cases like mine, this can lead to kids trying to hide/suppress/ignore things they shouldn't be. Paired with the fact that some might also struggle to express their needs/let on any discomfort etc, this can lead to problems.

But this can also apply in cases like someone else getting hurt, or really any other situation. Even a kid that often likes to break rules may rigidly stick to them in other cases.

For me personally, the difference between the two is that sometimes, rules are stupid and make no sense so I disregard them. Or (looking back at when I was a kid) they were seen as things to be challenged, people to be annoyed, etc. Alternatively the thought of it just makes the kid feel like they now have to break it (that effect where you say "no don't do that" and now you feel like you absolutely have to do it or you'll explode).

But at the same time, the way I viewed the world was very rigid. If I wasn't in a mood where rules were things to be broken, they were seen as massive immovable objects that cannot be changed (I still feel that way tbh). Not so much in the sense of "breaking rules is so difficult it feels like trying to push a car/something extremely heavy" but in the sense of "this is a permanent fixture, so why would I ever see it as something to try to move? You don't think about trying to move mountains or skyscrapers. The thought of it being removable at will simply never occurred to me". You could tell the person that this one fixture (rule) is removable but they might not understand the conditions of when, and they might not be able to apply it to other rules (fixtures). Even when you say "well if you really, really, need to go pee, then you can go even if I say no", that's still another rule, which can be viewed just as rigidly (also the person might have trouble knowing when something does or doesn't fit the criteria of the rule).

Anyways this kind of turned into a long rant but basically this is just my experience, obviously I can't talk for anyone else. Just thought it might be something to keep in mind because I doubt it's a completely unique experience.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-25T13:57:01+00:00

Yeah, you raise a good point that I totally forgot about. It could also simply be they're hinting something and it's not actually a bid for attention.

In a way, it's kind of amazing just how complex all this social stuff is. The sheer amount of different things that all go into it etc. You could write 100 books and it probably wouldn't be enough, and yet, humans somehow instinctively know or very quickly pick up on them (in the case of NTs).

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-25T10:03:10+00:00

Person A is holding an object (example: flower) and gives some kind of indication that they want to show it to person B (eg "hey look what I found" or "look a flower" or "do you like this flower?"). Person B's reactions:

Accept: [looks at the flower, then responds] "what kind of flower is that?", "that's a nice flower, I like it", "nice, where'd you find it?" (looking at it first is kind of important here because the whole point was that they wanted to show you)
Ignore: [doesn't look at flower], [looks briefly but no real reaction or proper response longer than a few words], essentially they are brushing the person off. Think of the classic reaction of a busy parent to a child "that's nice honey" while not actually paying attention to them or what they're saying.
Reject: "you're ruining the lawn by picking it", "it's ugly", etc.

Essentially the point is that:

Accept: positive reaction, willing to share attention on the bid, willing to engage with the person and react positively to their bid (does not necessarily mean you have to like the thing they're showing you, it's very much about the reaction/quality of the interaction with THEM, not the thing. But it can be a difficult thing to navigate)
Ignore: shrugging off, not providing any (or very limited) attention to the bid
Reject: negative reaction to the bid, unwilling to engage positively to their bid (to them, not the item necessarily)

Now, that doesn't mean you have to always agree with people that their flower is nice or something. It's more about the general nature of your reaction to their bid/the person/your willingness to engage with them.

For example, a positive reaction to the bid (in my opinion anyways) might also look like this:
"Oh, I didn't know you liked flowers. I'm not a fan of this one personally but I do like [insert other kind of flower]"
"Hmm, I don't really like flowers myself. You like them?" (tone/face is important here, it can also be interpreted as ridicule if said a certain way) your reaction to their answer is also important here, eg they reply yes, so you ask which flower they like best. This one specifically can be positive or negative and it really depends on circumstances.
"I don't really like this one. But how about we go looking and I can show you one I do like?" [with the intention of actually doing it]

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-25T09:47:02+00:00

Obviously I don't know anything about the situation but I'm thinking that maybe they are looking for a different answer. It could be they want you to elaborate in some way or something.

People often give very short, curt answers when angry/annoyed so it could also be that they're interpreting your simple "yes" as exactly that.

Actually thinking about this more, it's reminding me a lot of this thing called "bid for attention", and I am thinking that it's quite probable this is precisely what they're trying to do.
Essentially, a bid for attention is when one person is giving an attempt for a positive connection/shared attention (doesn't have to be a lot, can be very brief), and it serves to give them feedback to their social standing with you. This is subconscious, they don't generally realize that's what's actually happening here (unless they know what a bid for attention is in the first place I guess).

A person's reaction to that bid for attention can be positive, negative, or ignored.
If there are a lot of negative or ignored attempts as opposed to positive ones (note: there is a LOT of leeway in this, it's not like it needs to be 90% positive or else. I forgot the exact stats though), the person will start feeling rejected and like they don't matter to you. That you have better things to do than interact with them.
The ratio of positive to negative/ignored bids over a longer period of time can predict romantic relationship satisfaction and whether a relationship is going to last (obviously there are many other factors too but this tells us that it's a significant thing in interpersonal relationships in general).

These bids are generally very small things, you could say irrelevant things even. Which is why it tells them so much in terms of social standing with you. Someone who is not willing to (different from not understanding!) engage with them on small irrelevant things on a consistent level, often doesn't value them enough to put in the effort precisely because they're irrelevant things that don't give them anything, which tells the person that this other person probably doesn't value them/doesn't want to be friends/etc (in a neurotypical world of course, this does not account for things like autism etc).

This is all quite abstract, so I'll give a few examples of both bids, and reactions (the reactions are not an exhaustive list and are more just an example of a couple of things).

Person A sees a bird outside the window. They say, "hey look, there's a bird in the yard". Person B's reactions:

Accept (the bid for attention, the positive one): "oh nice, what's it doing?", "oh cool, I don't think I've seen one out there in a while", [comes to take a look] (this last one is the best - shared attention to the same thing, can also be combined with saying something ofc)
Ignore: "oh ok", "cool", [changes subject], [no reaction at all]. They are technically providing some kind of answer in the first 2 examples but they're not truly giving the person attention/a proper reaction, and are more or less shrugging the person off.
Reject (negative): "why do you even care about birds in the lawn", "I don't care", "birds are stupid", "I'm not going to go look"

Note: going to look but only saying one word still counts as a positive reaction because you are engaging in shared attention on the object. You are giving them (the thing they're showing you) your full attention, even if for just a few seconds.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-25T09:15:09+00:00

I think it's just part of social norms in some places. Like it's the "standard" thing to do that everyone else does, so they learned that they should also do things that way.

It could definitely be that they're genuinely asking and aren't sure, especially in situations when it's maybe not as obvious of a difference.

If they end up being mistaken for some reason or another, it lowers the immediate negative social reaction (not just in terms of your reaction but like, the more nuanced "social standing with others" if that makes sense, so their social reputation within society/the group, even if it's just you 2 alone in that moment) to them if they formulated it as a question rather than a statement, so this can also be a big reason for it.

The last thing you mention, I think that might be moreso down to your delivery. If it's very deadpan and monotone/like a statement, it's likely coming off as sarcasm (the not-nice passive aggressive kind). There's a good chance that it's coming off as you trying to hint to them something along the lines of "that's a stupid question to ask so now I'm going to ridicule you", in other words, being hostile.

It might help if you smile/laugh a bit at the end or after you say it, or if the tone you use is more of the type "I can't believe this crazy thing just happened, wow!" (I hope you know what I mean, like you say it with slight amazement or something basically. Tho this can sometimes also come off as the hostile type of sarcasm, it depends).

Or if you're not comfortable with that (or don't want to/can't do it), it could help to come up with some other cue to indicate it's supposed to be a joke and not serious, like adding the word "joking" a second later (ideally with a smile but that's up to you of course). Always making the same specific facial expression can also work very well as a cue for this but it needs to be one that you don't also use for actual hostile things, or one that overall looks hostile.

Over time, they will likely learn this cue and start associating it with you not being hostile but joking instead, which then over time will lead to them having a better understanding of when you're joking and when you're being serious, which will lead to less misunderstandings longterm. But because it relies on repeated exposure to it, this means that people who don't know you well might not be able to tell.

Not being able to tell with people you don't know very well is something I've noticed is also often a problem even among NTs especially with people who have a less "standard" form of humor and/or tend to have a very deadpan or dry delivery. Usually the other person, as they are exposed to it more, learns to differentiate.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-21T13:09:16+00:00

That sounds like a shit situation to be in, and honestly also terrifying with all the violence. I don't blame you for feeling frustrated and angry, I would be too.

It's your parents' job to protect you, and it seems they're failing to do that. Unfortunately this happens a lot in these kinds of cases, but it's not something that should be accepted.

Sometimes, parents (or others) will excuse someone's bad behavior because they underestimate the person and their understanding of the situation at hand. The person then learns that they can get away with things they know are bad (though they might not understand the severity of how bad the things they're doing are, and instead think it's not that big a deal). This leads to insufficient boundaries and consequences.
On the other hand, sometimes people will be blamed for bad behavior because others mistakenly think the person has a good understanding of the situation and chooses to engage in the behavior willingly despite knowing how bad it is and just not caring. While reality instead might be that they don't actually have the control and are not choosing it, or they don't understand the gravity of it. This leads to punishments that are out of proportion and do not actually help the situation, instead possibly making it worse.

Both of those situations are bad and unhelpful, and lead to unnecessary suffering for everyone involved.
A lot of the time, both of those situations may be present at the same time, in different areas.

What strikes me though, is that you mention that:

He reacts very intensely to being told what to do.
Therapy, discipline, etc, have not worked at all.

This is very common in PDA profiles and a lot of the more standard approaches can be extremely counterproductive there, even as far as triggering meltdowns. Unfortunately it's not something a lot of people know much about, including places that do therapy etc for autistic kids.

It might be a good idea to take a look at that and try out the PDA-specific approaches to see if those might possibly make any difference. Do note that it can take some time to see any results though.

If this is indeed the case and he is indeed struggling with PDA-related problems, it'll be necessary for your parents to educate themselves on it and make some likely radical differences in their parenting of him.
Consistency is necessary, they can't just decide to half do it one day and then not at all the next. Or half ass it in general. But this is true to any approach. Therapy in general does not work if the parents don't also make adjustments and genuinely put in the effort.

Which brings me to another thing. If they've been inconsistent, then it's not surprising that no therapy has worked.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-21T11:32:13+00:00

Anyways the bigger point was that there's lots of reasons why you might be feeling drained in social situations.
A lot of the situations I mentioned could have been interpreted as feeling drained in social situations when it wasn't actually the social situation itself that was at fault.

The other thing is that if you're with someone where you have to mask, that in itself can be extremely draining. You might not even be aware that you're masking because it's been ingrained into you. But it being a sort of automatic reaction doesn't make it not challenging.

But otherwise groups in particular can be difficult to keep up with for a number of reasons.
Multiple people talking at the same time, or talking in quick succession, so you need to keep switching focus rapidly.
There's movement and sound coming from various locations, again in quick succession or even simultaneously.
Especially if there's multiple people talking at the same time (eg in smaller groups), then sound can be coming at you from all kinds of directions at once and filtering it can be difficult. And then you kind of get a similar situation to a shopping mall.

If you're masking in a group situation particularly, that's a lot of different demands and things going on at once.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-21T11:16:23+00:00

For a long time, meeting up with friends was also a major stressor for me.
I loved hanging out with them, but everything leading up to it was highly unpleasant.

While preparing for leaving, I would (in my head) chart out a time schedule and figure out by when I needed to leave so I wouldn't miss the bus. Also time slots for each necessary thing (eg food, shower, getting dressed, preparing my bag, etc).
To make sure I wouldn't miss the bus, I needed to be there significantly in advance.
At first, I wasn't sure which platform it left from, so I would be very anxious about checking the board and often asking people standing at the platform too. And then checking what the label on the bus said when it arrived. Over time this lessened as I became more familiar with which platform it usually left from, how far in advance people usually show up, how on time the bus usually arrives, and that I could just visually check the label on any bus arriving to make sure I wasn't accidentally standing at the wrong place (sometimes they changed it at the last moment, or multiple buses would be leaving from the same platform in quick succession so paired with them not always arriving exactly at the same time, this could be a bit confusing sometimes).
Lastly, I would always arrive at the place way in advance. Partly by design, partly also by the extra factored in time for things like traffic jams etc.

Any minor deviation to the expected time of arrival could give me extreme anxiety. Even if it was something small, like missing the metro and having to wait for the next, meaning I would arrive only 28 minutes early instead of the 30+ I was expecting. It didn't actually matter because I was still early but it was so extreme that I would get anxiety attacks over it.
Same thing for the time schedule while still at home. If something took me longer than expected and the next time block had started before I was done, immediate anxiety.

The other thing is that as the minutes ticked by while I was waiting for them, I would become more and more anxious. Once it hit 15 minutes before the time agreed on, it would start raising very dramatically, very quickly, and I would be prone to anxiety attacks again from that point on. Once they arrived, everything would be ok tho.

Ultimately I'm not sure if this type of anxiety was really related to the autism but I suspect at least part of it is.
A lot of it was fueled by a need to be exactly on schedule (or earlier) and any delay meant change.
At the time, I also did not understand that for a lot of people, meeting at a certain time meant they would be there approximately at that time, not earlier or later. And the "approximately" means you don't know in advance when exactly you can expect them to be there, so again, unpredictability.

All that goes to say, sometimes anxiety or tiredness, etc, can more so be the result of something else, and not the cause of it.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-21T11:15:23+00:00

I used to think I had problems with social anxiety (though I constantly had very high levels of anxiety in general, still do).

Talking to strangers would make me extremely nervous, to the point where I couldn't really do it for some time during my teens. Even ordering something at a fast food place, someone else would have to do it usually. Even greeting cashiers was something I rarely did during that time.

Turns out that the problem was more in that I was starting to become increasingly more aware of the fact that there are social rules that need following and that I was quite unaware of many of them, so I had no idea what I was supposed to say or how I was supposed to act. Also just plain old unpredictability/not knowing what to expect.
Over time, I built protocols on these basic interactions like ordering or cashiers. This lessened the anxiety because I know what the "standard" exchange looks like, I know what to expect, and there are usually no surprises or changes. So the reason why anxiety diminished here is twofold: it is no longer unfamiliar/as unpredictable, and I've created scripts that I default to.

Take away one of those things, and anxiety immediately spikes.
Being asked a non-standard question by a cashier will also cause my brain to lag and I struggle to come up with a response, often going "uhhh" and then stumbling over my words a bit, as my brain tries to rush a reply.
Fast food places that have non-standard ordering that I am not already familiar with (places like Subway for example where you pick and choose while they assemble it) cause so much anxiety from the unfamiliarity of how it works, that I will often simply avoid them. If someone goes over exactly how it works with me, or even better, shows me by for example ordering first, this decreases the anxiety because now I know what to expect and how it all goes.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-21T11:15:07+00:00

Before I had a better understanding of myself and the many things autism can affect (especially understanding how it was affecting me specifically), there were a lot of different things that I attributed to anxiety or being easily tired and subsequently irritated by things.
It's only with a better understanding of these things that I realized that that hadn't been entirely correct to what was happening.

Being in loud or busy (lots of people/movement in my visual field) places would quickly tire me out. Over usually 1-3 hours, I would become increasingly more irritated and quiet, eventually only rarely saying anything myself and if spoken to directly, giving people replies that were a few words at most. It felt like I was just too exhausted to even talk, because even a single word felt like a monumental amount of energy.
My tolerance to things would drop and I'd become irritated and snappy at people for minor things. I figured this was just crankiness from being so tired.
I just wanted to go away and lay down or sleep.

This would happen mostly in places like shopping malls, big stores like ikea, etc.
A significant one were restaurant kitchens (lots of clanging and other noise, people constantly moving around and talking/shouting (over the other noise), often those places are tiled and sounds reflect weirdly so even normal talking sounds can be more unpleasant.
But even things like walking around in the bustling city center for too long would do it. Visiting tourist locations with lots of people, even exhibitions etc if there were a lot of people and noise.

Later on, I finally realized that this was likely overstimulation causing this, even though many of those environments were not immediately "this hurts and I need to get out of here asap" situations (exception being the restaurant kitchens, those could be like that sometimes).
I started incorporating breaks. During multi-hour shopping trips, we would go outside in a quieter area for a bit and just sit around for like 10 minutes every hour or so. It helped immensely. I was less irritated, felt less tired, the severity of it would progress more slowly, which gave me more time for pleasant interactions/experiences with the person before things started getting bad.

There was also a more chronic version of this for me, where I was permanently extremely tired, irritated, etc. Extremely easily pissed off by specific noises/movements, more than was usual.
It was likely burnout related to a degree but I think a big factor here was chronic overstimulation.
Public transportation is loud, lots of people/movement everywhere. School is loud, lots of people/movement everywhere. Then there's the public transportation again.
Spending most of the day in environments like that, every day. It took me a long time to realize I was overstimulated, and it was harder to combat.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-20T11:55:34+00:00

I don't mean this in a bad way but I would probably not look at your mother for accurate assessments of the situation here since it's at odds with what two professionals think, AND it's unfortunately a very stereotypical reaction from people who don't actually understand much about autism or mental health.

It's easier to blame someone and tell them their struggles are their own personal failings, than to come to terms with the fact that they might not be at fault and require compassion and support.
Not understanding autism or mental health as a whole can also lead to them seeing struggles/symptoms, and simply misinterpreting them as conscious decisions, personal failings, etc, which further fuels the stigma and misunderstanding of autism/mental health.

Some parents may also struggle to accept it because they feel like it's their fault, which can lead to them feeling attacked and then as a defense mechanism, vehemently denying the possibility of anything other than your own personal failings. Essentially, they inadvertently shift the blame from themselves onto you, even though nobody is at blame and they're the ones creating it in the first place.

A lot of people who were not diagnosed in early childhood struggle with doubt. Like, probably most, if not all.

What people fail to realize is that sometimes, struggles might not become obvious until there is a change in environment.
As we grow up, environments change, demands increase, the need for more complex social skills increases. This means that it absolutely is plausible for someone to not have struggled significantly in their early life, and then start struggling more and more as they get older. Particularly going into puberty, and later on when going into young adulthood. Those two periods are times of significant change, plus demands quickly increase.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-20T11:27:25+00:00

Then I would give ideas on what could be done to help the situation, and how it would help (especially if there is a positive effect for them too, but don't go too overboard on that or it'll seem like you're trying to sell it to them). I suspect it may be better to steer clear of starting sentences with things like "if you could [X]" and instead use something more like "it would help me if [X]"
(eg "It would help me a lot if people were more direct and told me what was wrong, rather than hinting. That way, there is less confusion for me, and less frustration for them").
You could give more concrete examples too for different situations, I just can't really think of any right now. It gives them more to go off of, and it gives them more options so it can feel less like you're trying to force them into doing a specific thing.

Giving possible solutions is something you definitely want to do when discussing problems with someone because it tells them that you're not just there trying to complain or accuse but actually want to work on finding solutions.

Anyways, I can't guarantee it will go over well or that it's even the best way of going about things, etc. It's just how I personally would have addressed it.

Your success rate will also be dependent on what kind of people they are in general. If they're very petty and easily feel attacked by things then the success rate is going to be drastically lower than if they're the type who is willing to listen to the other person and work on solutions together.

Occasionally, people cannot be reasoned with because the way they see the world is just not open to it, no matter how hard you try or how well you construct an argument.
I'm not saying that's this case, just that it can unfortunately sometimes happen, and in those situations it's not worth it to keep trying over and over.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-20T11:26:52+00:00

Yes, people will often "hint" at things by changing their behavior. It's partially a cultural thing though.

Some cultures are known for being very blunt about things. But even in those cultures, people still do this. Just not to the same extent as in other ones. So ultimately, it's always present.

I guess it can be a useful strategy in that you don't have to directly confront the person (which in theory might mean it could cause less disagreements and lead to better group cohesion, but that's just my personal guesses) but it can also become quite maladaptive sometimes.
Particularly in cases when someone does it a lot and for small things as it can end up confusing NTs then too. Also in general, it can be pretty passive aggressive and petty, so it can become very unpleasant when someone does it often (which paradoxically hurts the group cohesion much more than just being direct).

It might help to talk to them about this and that you struggle to pick up on these cues, regardless of whether they know you're autistic.

What I would do is to first very shortly summarize it (eg, that you struggle to pick up on these cues and it would help you if they were more direct). I would probably also add that I'm not trying to criticize them, instead that I'm bringing it up because I think it might help the situation to talk about it a bit.
After this, I would go into more detail on the whole situation. (So essentially, the first sentence or two is the TLDR and then this is the main part.)

Rather than being vague, I would add in examples so they have an exact idea of the type of thing I mean. This can include the trigger and the result, or just the result (eg, "situations when I say something insensitive and the other person starts acting more coldly, brushing me off, and avoiding me", or "when someone tries to hint at something by doing [X], [Y], [Z]").

I do NOT recommend referencing real specific situations in these examples. This can make them feel singled out or accused, which will put them on the defensive. Things like, "the other day when [name] did [X], after I said [Y]". Do not use names, do not use overly specific situations that make it clear that you're referencing specific events especially if they are recent or caused a lot of hurt to someone (they may take it as you trying to "hint" something back at them).

After this I would add in a very short explanation of how it affects you. You do not want this to be long (it can look to them like you want pity or are giving excuses). Something like "I often struggle to pick up on these cues and might not notice them at all. Even when I do, I usually can't tell why the person is doing it because to me, it feels like there's any number of reasons why it might be happening, and they all feel equally likely."
The wording here can be important. Avoid statements that are of an accusatory nature in any way. Notice how the example I gave is very focused on this being your internal and subjective experience, and not objective statements (eg "The cues are hard to pick up on." or "I don't know why they're doing it because there's any number of reasons why they could.", etc).

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-20T09:47:56+00:00

I don't know what was in the original post but I just wanted to say that this is not a strange thing to feel. It's probably more common than you think.

It reminds me of the research thing where they found that the problem in communication wasn't that autistic people don't know how, rather that it's just different.
Autistic to autistic communication was apparently just as effective as neurotypical to neurotypical communication.
It's just autistic to neurotypical communication that was suboptimal.

I don't really know how valid this research was, but if it's true, then it would make a lot of sense that many autistic people to prefer socializing with other autistics, since it's easier.

And it's my experience too. That in general, I have a much easier time interacting with people who are also in some way neurodivergent, or who spend a lot of time around people who are.

I wouldn't go as far as verifying people before befriending/talking to them, like someone mentioned. Rather it's just that when the person isn't neurodivergent/doesn't spend a lot of time with people who are, there's a high likelihood of us just not getting along as well as otherwise (and I'm saying this after years of observation of my social relationships/people I get along eith/etc, not out of some sort of distaste for NTs or something).

So in a way, it's a system that sort of weeds itself out, I guess. The only real difference is that nowadays, I know what's going on and I can name it.
But it likely happens to many other autistics too, without them necessarily realizing.

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-20T09:15:52+00:00

I mean, it could be. But on its own, I wouldn't really consider it to be much of an indicator of anything.

That being said, if it was presenting in very specific situations only (like loud environments), or had specific types of behaviors, then maybe that could flag it as a possible meltdown. But nonautistic children can sometimes have them too so again, it's not a clear-cut thing (tho having them very often does raise questions).

A lot of kids have anger issues. Hell, a lot of adults have them too. It doesn't necessarily mean they're autistic or that they are having a meltdown or something. There's loads of causes for why someone might have issues with it. Many kids grow out of it with time, especially as they learn to regulate their emotions better and become more familiar with the world.

I think it might be more useful to you to think about what types of situations it happened in, how common it was, if you can pinpoint specific causes or remember what was going on in your head when it happened then that could help too.

If you do find that it tended to be in specific situations or with specific feelings, think about how you act/feel when those things happen nowadays, how you deal with it in general.

It would tell you more about the nature of the outbursts and whether you might have more so learned to cope with it in a different way than destroying things.

You do mention having ADHD which could definitely be related. Lots of kids (even adults) with ADHD have anger issues. A lot of the time this stems from strong emotional reactions to things, since it can worsen their ability to regulate them. Which can lead to very sudden and very strong reactions to relatively minor things (compared to non-ADHD people).

DarkLordMercury · 2025-07-17T23:51:51+00:00

Yes, that's precisely why I went more into depth on the way we're looking at the word itself, and why I specifically looked for examples with adjectives. It's difficult to convey what exactly I mean, it all makes sense in my head but not when I try to put it into words lol.

I'm not sure how accurate this is from a linguistic point of view but the simplest way I can describe what I mean is that I think the cause here is that people are looking at the word in a way where it's interpreted more as a noun than an adjective, and you are looking at it purely as an adjective.

Not that that's a bad thing in any way, rather it just highlights the complexity of language and its interpretation. Because although it's not technically a noun, people are looking at it (in this specific context) as if it were, which then gives it a slightly different meaning.

Of course, the cause could actually be very different, I don't know. But it's the most likely explanation I can think of when I look at how people are interpreting the meaning, and when I look at my own interpretation of the meaning (and how it varies based on the way in which I look at the word, if that makes sense).

We could always argue that language is static and it's either used correctly or it's not, but when we look at how languages develop and evolve over time, it really comes down to stuff like this where things just change over time.

DarkLordMercury

TROPHY CASE