Jump to content
Software Update Finished, feedback welcome Read more... ×
CrazyBoards.org

Cerberus

Inmate
  • Content Count

    2982
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cerberus

  • Rank
    Not Entirely Human

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    male
  • Location
    The Abyssal Inn

Recent Profile Visitors

7310 profile views
  1. Utter incompetence. Abandon this quack at once and find another pdoc. I have no patience whatsoever with anyone who tells someone with MI that he or she "wants to be sick". It's absurd on its face. If she's already admitting there's nothing she can do for you, then you are now free and clear to kick her to the curb and find a professional with actual skills who can help you. And there are such persons out there. I'm steaming on your behalf.
  2. Oh that it were, indeed. It may be that I hold my view strongly because I have found CBT extremely effective in my own life. I am entirely prepared to accept the possibility that a person's feelings can be prompted by another, and that the responsibility for the control of those feelings lies in the response. That also is plausible to me, but it does not alter my underlying premise that lays the onus upon the person feeling the effect to make a rational personal assessment of what that response should be. You suggest that severe trauma may lead to situations where limbic response does take over the person's response beyond rational control, and has identified treatment methodologies; i.e. it enters the realm of pathology. In most cases, I would not think it goes as far as that. The entire realm of the of those disciplines is woefully male-slanted. Ish? With great respect, Geek (as always), being autistic is not something one can dangle one's toes into. You do not have the dx. Your insights have value from an NT perspective - as one observing autistics - but please realize that not being autistic, you cannot present as though you were "sort of" or "a little". I mention this only in closing, because your comments do have value.
  3. I see you've tried Effexor, Wellbutrin and Adderall, but did you try them in combination with each other? That's what's keeping my head above water (just). Using Effexor as the uptake inhibitor and the Wellbutrin and/or Adderall (or Vyvanse) as a release agent helps you produce more of the neurotransmitter you need available, and keep it in your system longer.
  4. Happy Hanukkah to all our Jewish members. May your oil burn forever.

  5. @Southern Discomfort - Wow. That has to be the most succinct summation of the problems with this issue that I’ve heard. You get a cookie.
  6. I confess myself disappointed in this statement. My original post had no intent as a defense of any sort for Mr. Tyson's alleged (and it is at this time alleged) behavior, and I made it clear from the beginning that I not only had no information that he is on the spectrum, but personally doubted it. The particulars of Mr. Tyson's case are in fact beside the point, and only serve as a launching-point for the broader discussion. I rather expected pushback on my assertion regarding the question of whether the handshake woman was made to feel a certain way. I have a firm rationalist philosophy about this based on my own experience in coping with unpleasant emotions, which I readily understand is not something that everyone to which everyone subscribes. I rule my emotions; I do not permit them to rule me. Otherwise, life would be intolerable for me as an Aspie. No one can make me feel anything, and I contend that I cannot make anyone else feel anything. It is the other person's election to allow his or her limbic response to govern his or her actions. In the case of the handshake woman here, you explain that she feels "uncomfortable" and "spooked" because the person confronting her has power and is big. She will always, thereafter, worry if she is alone with him. You say that now, she has cognitively extended her concern (without corroborating experience) to a state that makes her fearful to talk to any man on the street, even though her own logical faculties tell her that the likelihood of peril is small and the fear is on the whole irrational. We are discussing her feelings here, her emotional state. You are suggesting that the event has resulted in lasting emotional trauma that has so indelibly altered the woman's state of mind that she has only the extreme recourse of walking away from her job. I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. None of what you have explained has absolved the woman of taking responsibility for her own state of mind, for confronting her own fears in a rational manner, and for forwardly communicating her feelings in a self-affirming way. Were we talking about a transgression of greater magnitude, there might be greater claim to mental trauma, but at some point the recipient - I will not say victim - of an unwelcome encounter must make a self-determination that only he or she can make as to whether he or she was in fact harmed in a real way, and, realistically, how resilient he or she can be to recover under his or her own power. You state that "there are boundaries that are absolute. The body is one of them" but there is no absolute definition of personal space; where one person may dislike any touch at all, another person may be entirely untroubled by it. The boundary is only absolute to the individual who sets it, and that boundary cannot be known to others - beyond a set of socially common taboos - unless it is expressed. My entire post was intended not to debate the broader issues - I find the public discourse on the matter currently so mired in a fetid bog of neurotypical emotionalism that I fear its potential for positive societal change will be squandered. Rather, I simply wished to question whether autistics might be particularly vulnerable in the trending environment. I fully concur with your view that broader education on the nature of autism may help, but at the same time, it wouldn't hurt for NTs to learn that feelings are not the same as facts. In the spirit of full disclosure, I am a male. I have Asperger's Syndrome. I have been physically assaulted at my workplace. I have been sexually assaulted quite seriously on more than one occasion. I do not write from a position of ignorance, and I can only attest that I am not compelled by any emotion to say #MeToo to any of it.
  7. Help yourself, Chief. I stand behind everthing I say.
  8. Why must you raise your voice? How does that maintain your sense of self? Shouting does not make your argument any stronger, and broadcasts that you feel insecure. Rather than going into the situation prepared to start shouting, perhaps you could take a little time ahead to imagine the encounter. Imagine how the conversation might go. Rehearse in your head what questions he will likely ask you, especially the ones that will set you off. Then think about how you would answer them. Imagine how he will react to your answers, and figure out what it is that brings you to the point of shouting. Then, since it hasn't actually happened yet and you have time to plan ahead, try to come up with what you could say instead of shouting that would give you a sense of self-confidence and determination that would allow you to answer him in a normal, calm tone and show that he isn't going to ruffle you. After all, he might just be pushing your buttons. In the end, it doesn't matter what he says - you are who you are, and you don't answer to him. There's no need to shout at all. You could even say that. Or flip the script, and start asking the in-depth questions about him...
  9. [This post assumes that both genders can be victims of sexual aggression, and examples herein, while grammatically gendered, are not so to demonstrate a gender-specific point. Don't throw brickbats.] I read in the news today that Neil deGrasse Tyson has been accused of inappropriate sexual behavior by three women. I have no idea whether he is on-spectrum; given his fluency as a communicator, I doubt it. But reading the details got me thinking. One complained that he peeked under the covered part of the shoulder on her sleeveless dress to see a tattoo of the solar system that she had mentioned at a party of the International Astronomical Congress; while she apparently acknowledges it wasn't an assault, she says it shows he is capable of "creepy behavior". Another felt he had given her an "awkward and incredibly intimate handshake". The third, more serious, alleges waking up naked in his graduate student bed in 1984 after blacking out from a drink he had given her, with no memory of what had happened, but assuming he had drugged and raped her. She did file a police report years later, and began blogging about the incident in 2014, the year Tyson began hosting Cosmos on television, 30 years after the alleged event. I detail these things because I can easily, easily imagine an Aspie committing either of the first two gaffes in utter and complete innocence, and a neurotypical losing his or her wig over it because of a whole suitcase full of assumptions. And then... OMG, #MeToo! The pile-on begins. The suspicion. The pre-judgment. The inquiry. The Trial-by-Twitter. Is the Aspie, is the HFA, prepared, even equipped to contend with this? Hardly, because it is a social onslaught of NT making. It is warfare on the most hostile possible battlefield. Now, this is not to say that autistics cannot be guilty of interpersonal offense. Delayed development of social skills may result in inappropriate expression - indeed, "creepy behavior". Auties may not have a neurotypical's appreciation of personal boundaries. Yet there must be some consideration for the difference between willful sexual aggression and aggression without intent. For example: If a neurotypical 13-year-old boy walked up to a woman and openly touched her breast, there would rightly be consternation and outcry. That boy is old enough to understand that that constitutes a transgression. If an Aspie 13-year-old boy walked up to a woman and openly touched her breast, the degree of his offense would depend on the degree of his autism. He could very well simply be fixated on the shape, or the color of the blouse, or the fact that she as an individual differed from the individual next to her, in a tactile way, and did not process that an investigation was not in order. A neurotypical bystander, however, would not draw this distinction. Both cases would represent sexual harassment, because the woman would have had the sanctity of her body violated, and her sensibility outraged. And this is where my question arises with respect to the entire movement: Is there not some point at which a person's sensibilities - in essence, their feelings - must be weighed against other factors to determine whether an action rises to the level of an offense? The Universe is full of upsets; we are not guaranteed to be made constantly happy, not by events, and certainly not by one another. Indeed, that would be an impossibility, because it is seldom possible to make two persons equally happy in a single matter in which both are equally invested. At some point, the offended person must accede to accepting some level of annoyance, discomfort, embarrassment, shame or affront in situations, or we would all be constantly knifing one another for pounds of flesh (and then knifing one another over the knifings). Was the woman harmed when Mr. Tyson curiously looked at her shoulder? She was not. Was she embarrassed? Possibly. Was she demeaned in front of colleagues? One would have had to be present to know. Did Mr. Tyson act out of salacious intent, or simply because he couldn't resist looking at an image of the solar system? One would have to know him well to say, but his body of public life and work suggests the latter. Was the woman harmed by being creeped out by his handshake? She was not. Was she made to feel uncomfortable about further workplace interaction with him as a result? Ah! Here, one may come to differing views. In my view, she was not made to do so; she chose to do so. She did not address the issue in a positive-affirmative manner saying, "I'm sorry, that made me feel uncomfortable" and I would prefer to keep our relationship purely professional", thus giving him an opportunity to back gracefully away. She instead took the offense and ran with it, informing him that the next day would be her last day at work. She elevated the value of her own sensibility to a level higher than both the value of her job or the value of the fairness she owed to another human being. To my mind, she fails the test for sympathy. Because autistics so frequently are unable to relate to neurotypicals on an emotional level - i.e., the level of sensibilities - the possibility of negotiating understanding in this sphere is limited. That suggests the likelihood that autistics may tend to stumble more frequently in this arena of social conduct, and to fare poorly under a neurotypical lens when confronted. Perhaps, #MeNToo would be more accurate? Thoughts? Edited to add: Never mind the #MeNToo idea - I can already hear the fits being thrown because it looks like “men too”.
  10. At a guess, I would say Lamictal. I know, not helpful. Sorry. Couldn't stop myself. Please don't throw things.
  11. Effexor XR + Adderall - the combo. It's the only thing that's ever laid a glove on my treatment-resistant double depression.
  12. Cerberus

    This

    @Fluent In Silence - I resemble that to a degree that makes the diagram painful to contemplate...
  13. Nobody magically gets fine. You'd best have a better explanation than that if you're going to say you're fine. The sudden unexplained disappearance of symptoms that have hounded you for a decade is bound to prompt more scrutiny from a professional. Consider this: You say you've suffered for 10-12 years. Over that time, it appears the meds you've been prescribed haven't done the trick, or you wouldn't have needed to try the Phenibut. Now, you've discovered something that, at a low dose, works. The long-term goal is to find a strategy that allows you to remain at this level of calm, yes? Might it be to your advantage, then, to be truthful to your pdoc about your discovery so that you and she can discuss what this means and how it can be leveraged to alleviate your symptoms? Whether or not your pdoc gets upset personally, or seems angry, is immaterial, and frankly would be most unprofessional. You are the patient, and successfully resolving your illness should be her sole concern. Medications are simply tools - and if one uses them correctly and responsibly, there is no shame in using any of them to achieve healing.
  14. @Blahblah - Thank you for the kind words, and we're glad that you've found some solace and some help in our online asylum. CB isn't for everyone, but you found that it was for you, and we're glad you've stuck with us as a member, not only to gain from the resource here, but just as importantly, in contributing your valuable life experience and perspectives in your posts. Crazyboards IS our members in a very real way - its very fabric is made of the lives of people brave enough to struggle against their MI and share it with each other in peer support here, and with a broader world. As I write this, the site stands at 797,207 posts - over three quarters of a million lunatic posts - spanning 13 years since Crazyboards first became a free-standing and independent peer support forum. I know personally that we've changed lives. I know we've saved lives. With the continued help and commitment of all of our members, may we continue to do so. Cerberus Moderator
×