11/13/2025
People are sometimes confused when I speak about how a lot of the neurotypical communication style is incredibly harmful for both neurotypicals and neurodivergents.
Here are some examples of indirect communication to the point of toxicity 💜
__________________
John needs to feel loved by having a partner who voluntarily engages in texting regularly on a reasonable basis.
Saying "I love it when you text," or "I'm happy to hear from you," does not equate to "I need you to text me so I feel loved." Amelia wonders why their significant other, John, explodes later saying "you don't love me!" and Amelia's scratching her head saying "Of course I do, we went to Niagara last week and we spent the weekend being lazy in a hotel room watching our favorite show and being intimate, and I treated you to a fancy dinner??"
Miscommunication happens frequently in neurotypical to neurotypical communication, not just neurotypical to neurodivergent - and to be super clear, I'm really leaning into autistic communication versus allistic communication to drive home the lack of directive.
Amelia who is flabbergasted might not come out and say "I'm not sure where the communication is breaking down, can you please explain what you mean?" She's shouting back "of course you're loved, don't I do nice things for you?"
It's too easy for the blame and defense games to take place when one or both partners assume that their perspective is the correct one and to have their implied language reflect that.
Does it happen with neurodivergents? Of course. We're just more likely to have encountered ableism sooner where we're not allowed to assume the way we see things is the correct way - this is why many high-maskers often have implied communication styles as well; they have spent so much energy trying to fit in that being true to their needs would require a level of self-advocation they haven't prioritized or learned to do...
__________________
"Dear, that looks uncomfortable for you to be lounging on the chair, wouldn't you be more comfortable reading on the couch?"
"Oh sure, yeah that does look more comfy."
Totally innocuous right? So how does it look when John responds in the negative:
"Actually I'm really comfy in the chair, but thanks for thinking of me."
Amelia is cross, fuming to themselves, not in a great mood but settles herself down on the couch: she was never actually prioritizing John's comfort, it's more that perhaps it might be a byproduct of getting Amelia's own need met to set in the chair, but instead of advocating for that, she uses people-pleasing to try to manipulate the situation instead of just being honest.
Then Amelia may bring it up later as an example where John "clearly didn't consider Amelia's needs" when she didn't advocate for them in the first place, not to mention expecting another person to read their mind is an incredibly toxic trait; we ALL have different lived experiences and perceptions, so it makes sense that we all don't think of the world the same way.
Actually what would make this all even worse is that during the followup disagreement Amelia doesn't have the language to talk about how the experience meant they didn't feel safe around John as a result of the breakdown, and if she DOES have the language that's just as bad because now she's weaponizing the concept of emotional safety and placing the onus of her safety onto the person who cannot meet the original need to begin with;
We are all responsible for showing up as our most accountable selves; we cannot hold ourselves accountable for things we don't know about, and we cannot hold others accountable for emotional needs that come from past trauma.
All we can do is ASK them to meet that need and yes, ask, we MUST. There is no implication in the world that would have communicated that Amelia needed her safety in the relationship confirmed by having her need to sit in the chair granted.
__________________
Extras: What could John & Amelia have said to be direct in their needs?
John: "hey, I had a realization that in order to really feel loved, I need to be texted more without having to ask for it on a daily basis. Can we figure out an amount to text and would you be willing to prioritize it so that you set reminders for yourself?"
Amelia: "I should have been more specific - I actually really need the chair for my back, would you be willing to move to the couch?"
There are of course many other points in the discourse we can address, many potential fallouts and resolutions...
But none of that can start without the first advocation.
Some honey for thought - Buzz on Bees 🤗💜🐝♾️