They rarely fail to confirm things. But it gets annoying when I don’t ask for confirmation. I already know everything is about them. I am here only to appease them. If I can’t do anything for them, I’m worthless.

Even if ADHD or ASD traits are disadvantageous at the individual level in some contexts, they may benefit the group.

Um, Annie. (Real name). Did I ask you to confirm that everything is all about them? No. But they do claim to want to get ahead of things. But look at the news. They are doing a lousy job. Climate change, anyone?

What can you do for us?

Nothing, Annie, Becky, Mark. Absolutely nothing. They have done nothing for me (unless money/labor is exchanged), and I’m mimicking their behavior. I’m a good learner. It’s only fair.

I’m not doing crap for them anymore. The article mentions autism and pattern recognition. I gave warnings on things like many others (not all are autistic – lol). They ignored it, and now they are crying about healthcare, money, and AI. Whatever. And they continue to treat certain people/groups like crap. Willful ignorance?

---

I’m watching a person cry over being arrested. Not in real life, online. She has a $100k bail. She was shocked. I am a little surprised too, but I have to remember the Judge is basing her bail on watching a violent act and not reporting it.

She starts mentioning she has documentation and that she didn’t do it. But she has to prove it. I deal with reality, not what “people say,” or what was written over 100 years ago. Things like “the prosecution has the burden to prove the charges” or “innocent until proven guilty” mean little. REALITY. If she has documentation and people believe her, she might be fine.

Sucks having to prove yourself to people, right? They might not believe you, and you could be punished for life (for her maybe 5 to 15 years since Texas has parole — not a murder case).

Her husband is screwed. Did I mention that they were arrested together? He got another violent felony charge (related) after being in jail. He could get life. I’ve only seen people in Florida get life without parole for charges like this. But it is possible in Texas. It is Texas, after all.

Bottom line: innocent or guilty doesn’t mean much. Can you prove it? Do they like you enough to believe you? Or can you buy innocence if they don’t like you?

---

I don’t need validation. If a person knows themselves, why do they need validation? This isn’t good self-esteem, which people who like to simplify things tend to imply. It’s only being secure about this specific knowledge. I know my experience is valid, so I don’t need confirmation.

I don’t need someone else’s expertise on my experience. Linda is an expert on her life. I’m the expert on mine.

I don’t have to ask another person for their perspective. They weren’t there, and I know everyone’s life experience colors their perspective, so it’s pointless to base MY feelings on my coworker’s or mom’s. That wouldn’t make sense. Advice on how to do something is different, of course. I’m only referring to things that have already happened.

This is only considered odd to people with an external frame of reference. To me, relying on others to tell you about your own feelings and preferences is odd and irrational.

Example: I always have 0 to 2 hours of sleep when I take magnesium. I don’t care what every study or doctor says. I can’t sleep when I take it. Of course, I have stopped and now won’t go near it. (I wish they would stop putting it in every vitamin mix. So annoying!) But no doctor or anyone who trusts medical research believes me. It must be something else, but of course, I singled magnesium out and compared every ingredient on the bottle. Of course! AS IF I didn’t try different companies.

I guess people who want to deny my experience don’t know me at all.

So, we have

• valuing people based on what they can do for the group
• having to prove yourself to others (AKA “the group”)
• and not needing people’s validation

I will leave it here for now. 3 topics that seem unrelated on the surface.

This Week in Media & Other Things

Music of the Week

Books of the Week

^{The Divorce Lawyer by McGarvey Black (Fiction). My rating: ★★★ (3.5 stars). The main character was too neutral. It made her boring, which made the book boring. Nothing to see here. The author was trying to be an objective storyteller, perhaps, but it didn’t work. The readers who reviewed the book weren’t impressed, and now I know why. But I went 2+ weeks without finishing a book, and this book ended my drought. Yay! However, it’s easy to tell where this book is going. Like mystery, suspense, guessing? Skip this book.} 

^{Dancing with Death: The True Story of a Glamorous Showgirl, her Wealthy Husband, and a Horrifying Murder by Shanna Hogan (Nonfiction). My rating: ★★★ (3.75 stars). Too much of a slow burn, but the last couple of chapters kind of saved it. It sounds like an interesting story, so I’m not sure what went wrong. Maybe it could have been written better, or maybe the facts just aren’t that interesting? The victim was interesting, but this book is more about the suspects. Unlike most true-crime books, this one does offer a little doubt. But even that didn’t save this book.}

Quote of the Week