Fine, you win. Yes, I am susceptible to negativity. This sub has dried up to just a handful of posts a week. I'll delete my post and we can all just sit here in silence.

Sorry. I'm just trying to start a discussion. I think your response is pretty rude.

What are your thoughts on the potential influence of PDA? It seems like it reasonably could be a contributing factor.

Permanently Deleted

Slightly agree. I'm often specifically looking for people's motives because a) people are often quite self-interested, and b) because I know I can miss things.

I realise that I'm overanalysing everything most of the time. It's draining.

Definitely agree. You should see my bookmark, and file folder structures.

Again, I have a problem with the question. I get that the question is trying to measure systemization, but that can take many forms. Narrowing it down to just "information about" might have highly literal autists answering 'no' even though they've been collectors of whatevers since they can remember.

Slightly agree, though it's situational.

If it's a quick question with a simple answer, it isn't too bad. I may or may not have trouble returning. If it's a new shiny problem without an immediate answer, I can have difficulty letting go.

They're one of only 3 countries in the world who still use °F, and represent 98% of the population who do so. So it's basically just America.

I'm too concerned that there might be a missing consideration here to be able to say that. At surface value without additional factors, I know that calculation is tempting to make, but the paper doesn't necessarily say that. I think that logically, a set of very strongly correlated left-handers could exist that could skew the numbers. So if the research doesn't explicitly say it, then I wouldn't.

Farenheit is asking Americans how hot they feel.

I'm not too bad at reading emotion on people's faces in photos/videos, but I don't spend a lot of time looking at people's faces when I talk to them in person. I'm aware that things like microexpressions exist, but you need to be watching a person's face to catch them. I wonder why I've never seen this consideration discussed in relation to autism.

"Hey, are you not looking at people's faces when you talk to them? Is your attention split by thinking about the correct amount of eye contact that you should be making? You might be missing a bunch of subtle information that is expressed through facial expressions during conversations!" Groundbreaking research!!

I don't think I like this question. Especially the inclusion of knowing what someone is thinking. Knowing what someone is thinking would require an awful lot of context and familiarity with a person to the extent that everyone should be answering no.

I assume that you are right-eye dominant, which would determine firearm preference rather than your manual(?) handedness.

What percentage of the population is autistic? In Australia this year, 1:25 kids between 7 and 14 were identified.

Mixed-handedness is even more prevalent in people with autism. I'm mixed-handed too, left handed for writing, but most things can be either hand.

Link

Genetic? The interesting connection I think is with Fragile X syndrome where a genetic cause is known. There's a 50% comorbidity with autism. In one study only 37% of subjects had a right hand preference (low numbers, though). There are a bunch of papers looking at handedness and ND. Link

This post is relevant to my interests.

Can anyone?

Give me some examples of two things that people can do at the same time where one of them can't be reduced to muscle memory (and therefore effectively taking limited or no conscious thought to do).

Definitely disagree.

Both.

I am highly detail-oriented, but I'm aware of this and take time to make sure that whatever I'm focused on makes sense in the full scope of the work. I make efforts when looking at the full scope to find where my focus is most needed at that time.

I have to say 'definitely disagree', but there's a massive disclaimer on that. This question is too ambiguous for me.

This is so bad that I thought it might be satire comparing an obvious and typical physiological issue to autism for effect. I'm very sorry you had to deal with that.

Person 1: I need glasses to see.

Person 2: No you don't, that's nonsense. You just need to try harder.

Person 1: No, I have to strain hard and get a headache if I have to read without them. It's especially problematic given how important reading is on a daily basis.

Person 2: You're just doing this for attention.

Slightly agree.

I don't enjoy reading fiction much at all. I think I'm more interested in the worlds than the characters.

Oddly, this question gave me a flashback to reading The Outsider by Albert Camus in school. I remember it making me really uncomfortable. I just read the blurb again, I think the main character might have been autistically coded, and FFS, they made him kill someone and not feel guilt. :(