Talk page archive.

What I Learned from My Psychologist and About Myself

Recently, I was buying a meal from Wendy's. A Wendy's employee asked me, "Are you tired?" I replied, "No. I am autistic."

As an user, for years, I had issues with the guidelines and policies. Other then the personal speculation rule, which both my psychologist and myself agreed was unclear, I thought the original research rule was working against the purpose of this wikia. The purpose of the wikia was that each user was role-playing as a historical archivist. The rule prohibited against making connections and associations. If I rigidly observed this rule, as Pseudohuman rigidly observed the rule of personal speculation, many of the articles I had written would be considered original research. This rule compartmentalizes both the organic and the inorganic subjects and every fact had to be explicitly stated in the canon. In my study of history, I have learned that there were connections and associations. How can this site be an historical archive if it denied the nature of history itself? The thought of bringing this wikia in line with the guidelines and policies would be a terrifying prospect for any user. I am not comfortable with this degree of rigidity.

I have nightmares about not being able to express myself and communicate with others. These nightmares interrupt my sleep. As I didn't have recorded conversations between myself and my mother, I turned to this site, where such conservations were recorded. The longest conversation I had with someone was between me and Pseudohuman on Romulus' location.

I spoke with my psychologist on Wednesday. We talked about the Talk:Romulus page. He read the rules of this site, the full discussion of Romulus' location between myself and user Pseudohuman, and this user's summary. He thought the rules about speculation and the veracity of a character noteworthy; he thought the speculation rule was open to subjective opinion and he wasn't sure how one could determine the truthfullness of a fictional character's words. For the topic, he thought that I was attempting to express myself and engage with Pseudohuman on an interpersonal level. He thought that Pseudohuman was approaching this site on an intellectual level, didn't want to engage with me on an interpersonal level, and was reactive to my comments. My psychologist thought this user expressed comments that were hostile, which, as a consequence, could be construed as an attack on me. At one point, he couldn't read further after he read this user's comment that MA was not a "mental illness support group". He said the tone of this user disturbed him. I had to persuade him to read further.

As an autistic person, expressing myself with others was and is one of my greatest obstacles. When I am attacked, I feel isolated and alienated. On this site, I attempted to express myself. I think that some of the users weren't receptive to this. I can understand this. Sometimes when a person expresses themselves, they can't anticipate how the other person responds. Capricorn and Pseudohuman expressed different reactions to my expressing myself. The former showed ignorance of my condition and wrote that I was being passive-aggressive with myself, amongst other things. According to my psychologist, a person can't be passive-aggressive with himself; a person can be self-destructive. The latter, again, my psychologist thought, was adamant against engaging me on an interpersonal level and, working on an intellectual level, was using words that indicated the user was putting distance between themselves and me.

When I said that I felt I was under attack by this user, I was informed by 31dot and others that I was misinterpreting what the user was writing. I didn't think this way; however, at the time, I didn't have the opinion of someone who was more experienced in Human behavior and communication than I. I doubted myself. Listening to what my psychologist said today, I learned that I was grounded in reality and what I thought was not far from the truth. When it comes to words, identifying when you were being attacked by another user could be subjective, especially for an autistic person, and I think the person's charge that they are being attacked should be examined more thoroughly. The inability of Pseudohuman to engage me in a non-hostile manner was one of the reasons I have been absent from this site. If the user had told me that they didn't want to engage with me in this way, I would be accepting of this. My psychologist thought the user was not listening to my words and was quick to dismiss what I had written. The summary the user wrote was not reflective of what I had written and of the discussion as a whole, and I think the summary was more reflective of the user's opinion. I would have pointed out that, like maps of yore where the distances weren't accurate, that the location of a place was accurate in relation to other places. However, as I stated above, I was in violation of the original research rule for there was no explicit statement of Romulus in the Beta Quadrant.

I would have liked to rejoin this community. I did enjoy the intellectual exercise of this site; however, I do recognize that, because I am an autistic person, that I can become obsessed with this site. My psychologist, when reading what I wrote, noted that I was being obsessive, and thought that as I was being attacked by Pseudohuman, that being here had become unhealthy for me. With those reasons, my psychologist thought it was a good idea that I had left the community.

(Please note - I think you may be thinking that the psychologist is a sock puppet. He isn't a sock puppet; he is real. His name is Dr. Jeffrey L. Lazarus)

Faber est suae quisque fortunae - Appius Claudius Caecus (Every man is the artisan of his own fortune.)

Throwback (talk) 04:26, September 5, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.