RE: Mental balance as humans (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

kdsub -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/18/2012 12:45:41 PM)

quote:

You do realize I've been living with an ASD woman for 15 years now, providing life skills therapy among other things?


Why should I know that and why does that make a difference in your refusing to acknowledge basic problems people with autism often face. It just so happens that I have dealt with autism for 60 years...does that make me more of an expert than you? No...but from the way you are talking I can tell you that my experience is far different than yours and that goes hand in hand with this disability. It varies over a wide range of behaviors and is still little understood.

Many autistic children have a difficult time developing a moral compass and they assign guilt often inappropriately. I have never said his autism was the direct cause of this tragedy but that it possibly contributed to it.

Let me give you an example of how some autistic children react to certain situations and how it is perfectly possible that his disability explains why he killed the children.

Lets say you and I were brothers…I am autistic and you are not. Our mother is a school teacher at a local grade school.

We have an argument and because I am autistic I over react and become enraged inappropriately. You and I cannot end our argument so we go to our mother to decide who is right or wrong.

When we confront our mother she is very busy and tells us she does not have time for our arguing because she has to get ready for her class at school tomorrow and for us to knock it off before we both get a spanking.

You the normal child are still mad at me and perhaps mad at our mother but you do as you are told and move on. Me… the autistic child am now still enraged at you…and my mother…AND the children at school whom I now believe are directly the cause of my mother not having time for me. Autistic people often inappropriately assign guilt to others.

I am not saying this happened… or happens with every autistic child of course… but I am saying it is very possible this is why he could have taken his anger out on his mother AND the school children.

Over the years with my autistic sister I have seen this particular type of behavior over and over and over. There has been on occasion violence but that has been rare…but often she blames people inappropriately for actions they had nothing to do with.

Then at the end you say...."People respond differently to torture and attacks. Some respond with rage. Most don't" Yes most don't...but he DID respond with rage and directed it inappropriately which at least points to the possibility that his autism was a contributing factor.

And finally...back to my original point that you take exception to... the teaching of the autistic son by the mother in the use of weapons for killing. This in my opinion was inexcusable given the mental state of this child. There are many other ways to engage a child, with a possible underdeveloped moral compass, that do not include weapons for murder...How about baking cookies or hiking or riding a bike...come on Aswad...guns is the only passion she had?

Butch



cordeliasub -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/18/2012 4:04:43 PM)

There are several things that we can "know," based on a multitude of research and simple classification:

Autism occurs along a spectrum, and it is NOT a mental illness. It is a disability, but not a mental illness. And having taught children with autism for over ten years, I can tell you that every child is different.

Certain types of high intelligence do seem to correlate with lower levels of so-called emotional intelligence and the ability to pick up social cues. Those who excel in the maths and sciences seem to be less able to navigate social nuances, probably because those intelligences seem to be deeply based in mathematical logic, which doesn't usually translate well to human social situations. And whoever posted above is correct; IQ is a very limited assessment of intelligences. I personally prefer a measurement for "multiple intelligences" because it gives much more information. Emotional/social intelligence is an aptitude, but it is also a skill that can be learned in most cases. Mental illness and/or disability would be the exception to this. This boy may have had a high IQ, but his autism/asperger's (if that was the case) and possible mental illness or personality disorder would have made things extremely complicated for him.

The thing that most disturbs me in all of the discussions I have read on fora, facebook, even in the news, is the rush to generalize. I have friends who have children with autism who are nervous about people's perception of them now that asperger's/autism has been mentioned. I know personally I will be very careful about who I mention my bipolar disorder to for awhile. It may comfort us to begin saying "all people who are X" are now to be feared.....but it isn't accurate, and it is downright frightening for people with said issue to know that society as a whole may be scrutinizing them.

There isn't going to be an easy answer for all this, and there isn't going to be a solution that can assure us all that this will never happen again. And no matter how much we learn about this man and his family, there will never be a satisfactory answer to the "why."

So yes, I know some smart people who are really really weird. I know some not so smart people who are too. And I know some people who just think being an asshat somehow makes them superior. :)



Aswad -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/18/2012 4:37:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Why should I know that and why does that make a difference in your refusing to acknowledge basic problems people with autism often face.


I'm not refusing to acknowledge those problems, I'm acknowledging two sets of problems, and stating that one of those sets is greater, which doesn't diminish the other set.

quote:

Many autistic children have a difficult time developing a moral compass and they assign guilt often inappropriately.


It's been my experience most develop a solid moral GPS that doesn't always agree with the compass, and assign guilt correctly according to what information they have, rather than appropriately. It's also been my experience that competent child rearing tends to alleviate this problem, and that sufficiently competent child rearing is rarely available to them.

There's a symmetry in this position that you don't seem to get. Basically, if I do an average of the ASD people I've been exposed to, and an average of the NT people I've been exposed to, I could use the standards of either group to make a stereotypical assertion about the other group, and that assertion would include issues with the moral compass either way. There's just more of the NTs than of the ASDs, and a prevailing perception among NTs that a majority tends to be right, historical evidence to the contrary.

quote:

I have never said his autism was the direct cause of this tragedy but that it possibly contributed to it.


Of course. Everything he is/was was part of what he thought, and thus contributed, some of it supporting his decision, some of it detracting from it. Also, no doubt, his perceptions played a part, and as you know, autists and aspies both tend to have perceptions that don't align very well with neurotypical perceptions.

quote:

Let me give you an example of how some autistic children react to certain situations and how it is perfectly possible that his disability explains why he killed the children.


I already said I'm familiar with some of these examples.

quote:

We have an argument and because I am autistic I over react and become enraged inappropriately.


That's a seperate diagnosis in the upcoming DSM.

quote:

When we confront our mother she is very busy and tells us she does not have time for our arguing because she has to get ready for her class at school tomorrow and for us to knock it off before we both get a spanking.


That's bad parenting.

quote:

AND the children at school whom I now believe are directly the cause of my mother not having time for me.


They are directly the cause, though she of course has the option to prioritize her children over her work.

If she were a better parent, she would take the time to explain these things, and they would make a lot more sense to you; that's been my experience, across the board.

quote:

Autistic people often inappropriately assign guilt to others.


Inappropriately, in this example, but not incorrectly; neurotypicals also often inappropriately assign guilt, by the way, just according to a different template.

Again, the parents should have explained things better.

quote:

I am saying it is very possible this is why he could have taken his anger out on his mother AND the school children.


In the spirit of your example, let me provide you with another possible example:

The mother is under a lot of stress at work, and under a lot of stress from dealing with a struggling son with a disability, and a recent conflict over something related to the class, with four of the people at the school being the focal point of this conflict. She can't handle it, and kills herself with one of her many guns. Parents have tried to put forth having an autistic kid as a mitigating circumstance for killing the kid and even tried passing it off as a mercy killing, and teachers are often under a lot of stress, so this level of stress isn't far fetched, nor is suicide very far fetched. She does this during a brief reactive psychosis, and doesn't think clearly enough to leave a note.

The son comes home, finds his mother dead by her own hand, and he knows the source of the despair that drove her over the brink. He heads off in a fit of rage, which isn't necessarily very visible to anyone that doesn't know him, and he kills the people that caused- but, crucially, aren't responsible for- his mother's suicide. The police turn up, and he doesn't want to carry all that pain and rage to jail, so he shoots himself, being after all already distraught enough for suicide.

Most people don't kill a kid they consider to have killed their loved ones... but in the USA, that is acceptable, even to the courts.

A lot of people don't distinguish well between being the cause of something, and being responsible for something. In this example, simply teaching the kid the difference between those two might have led to a dramatically different outcome. In my experience, ASDs have little difficulty with this distinction, if they've actually been taught it, or come up with the concept themselves. Also in my experience, parents of ASDs and average therapists often fail to impart the distinction, which tends to result in a very different pattern of thinking for the ASD kid, one that appears unpredictable to the parents and therapists, but which is fairly predictable to anyone that does understand how the ASD kid actually thinks.

Note that I'm not saying this happened, as we know he tried to get a gun two days prior, I'm saying it's another example of how such a thing could have happened. Just illustrating that I can see many ways autism can contribute to a course of action that can seem to be bizarre to others. Of course, executing children seems bizarre to me, regardless of whether it's a court doing it, or a private citizen, but that's a cultural norm, I guess; ASDs have problems with cultural norms, particularly the inconsistencies in them.

It'll be interesting to see if the girlfriend and friend turn up at some point, and whether that adds pieces to the puzzle.

quote:

Over the years with my autistic sister I have seen this particular type of behavior over and over and over. There has been on occasion violence but that has been rare…but often she blames people inappropriately for actions they had nothing to do with.


Feel free to take some examples on the other side.

quote:

but he DID respond with rage and directed it inappropriately which at least points to the possibility that his autism was a contributing factor.


It may well have been a contributing factor. I'm not disputing that.

quote:

This in my opinion was inexcusable given the mental state of this child.


We know nothing about the previous mental state of the child.

We also don't know if the mother had stereotyped interests, which is definitely possible, given that there is a hereditary component; if she had a stereotyped interest, it is possible she was sharing what she had to share, including her passion for guns, with him. My experience is that guns can be a positive influence on autistics.

Of course, I would never have let the kid have access to the gun safe; I think we can agree that's a game changer.

An interesting question is why he had access. If it turns out he didn't normally have access, we can't really blame the mother for much of anything. If it turns out he did normally have access, we can certainly blame her for that, but I don't think we can blame her for teaching him how to use the guns.

quote:

There are many other ways to engage a child, with a possible underdeveloped moral compass, that do not include weapons for murder...


I'm thinking she was in a better position to judge whether or not he had a well developed moral compass than us, at the time.

And, again, storage and access are important unanswered questions.

quote:

How about baking cookies or hiking or riding a bike...come on Aswad...guns is the only passion she had?


If she was a high functioning autist or aspie herself, then a single, narrow field of interest is not at all uncommon, nor would a divorce be uncommon, nor would it be uncommon for the kid to prefer her company to that of a presumably neurotypical father in that case. Some ASDs don't communicate affection well, while others communicate it very well with "others of their own kind", and some communicate it well with anyone.

As you said, there's a lot of variation in ASD folks.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Aswad -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/18/2012 4:49:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub

Emotional/social intelligence is an aptitude, but it is also a skill that can be learned in most cases.


Absolutely. This is one of the areas I think it's sad that Vygotski is underappreciated. His methods are well suited to teaching ASD kids about emotional and social intelligence, which is something they benefit greatly from. Our NT cultures don't have a very rational streak in regard to child rearing, nor are the NT cultures themselves very rational. They can be explained to make adequate sense, however, and taught like any other skill, trained like any other talent, and in general mastered. Even by ASDs, who don't deal as well with the irrational.

quote:

The thing that most disturbs me in all of the discussions I have read on fora, facebook, even in the news, is the rush to generalize.


I'm more disturbed that this is prevalent among relatives and therapists of ASDs.

quote:

I have friends who have children with autism who are nervous about people's perception of them now that asperger's/autism has been mentioned.


There were people up here that had to be prescribed sedatives due to worry when the possibility of ASD was raised in the context of the 2011 Oslo/Utøya massacre, and ironically because they correctly predicted how society would react (it's been my experience they're not clueless about how people work, just clueless about why, unless taught the why part or smart enough to figure it out on their own).

It took a lot of effort over an extended period of time by many professionals working with ASDs to try to stem the rising tide of NT public "inappropriate assignment of guilt" (to paraphrase kdsub in an illustrative manner about my point in my other post), until that diagnosis was taken off the table, at which point the whole thing just blew over for the NTs, forgotten like it had never been mentioned. Irrational and nonsensical, but appropriate by consensus. ASDs have, IME, trouble with consensus as a valid substitute for logic, and thus a problem with appropriateness.

Humans aren't very good at cause/effect, responsibility/accountability and guilt/blame, whether neurotypical or not.

If one isn't riding the consensus, a different way of dealing with those can seem bizarre and unpredictable.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 5:25:09 AM)

Since no one gets handed the perfect childhood, all children have something to overcome, or that's been my experience. I remind you that I am not just a mother, but volunteered in my children's primary school for over 10 years teaching critical thinking skills via the Jr. Great Book Program.

Also, I have a son who is LD, and became enough of an expert in how to deal with the school system that I became an advocate for other parents. I can also say I am a minor expert in child psychology, having read a great deal on the subject.

So I believe I have some background in this 'talking point.' As a general rule, you can put a kid into one of two categories, verbal and social, less verbal and less social.

Now, we have to discuss why the less verbal child is less social. Well, the kid might just be shy, he might have a learning disability, a speech impediment, or have such high mathematical skills, he has limited interest in verbal skill. Any or all of these or any combination is possible, and it is by no means a complete list. But there isn't any way of getting around the fact that if you are verbal, you are more social, b/c being social requires you to talk to people.

And if you are not very verbal, you won't talk to people, and many will perceive you as dumb, stuck-up, overly-shy, or somehow mentally disabled -- and yes, I am thinking of your teachers, but your peers will think this way as well.

The question becomes how do you properly socialize a child who does not have a natural talent for it?

In my son's case, I spent huge quantities of money to send him to a private art high school in Chgo. I gave him the opportunity to be socialized with a group of *actual* peers - in other words to get time being at school with kids like him. Ones who were dyslexic and had other LD issues, but were genius level at some area of the arts. He thrived in that environment.

It did a great deal for his self esteem and ego development, and was worth every penny.

By third or fourth grade, the non-verbal kids are fairly adept at finding other kids like them and making friends and socializing, provided there are no home, or environmental, or other social/mental issues interfering with that process.

Since most of the time I taught Great Books, I taught 3rd and 4th graders, that was my observation.

Clearly, if you have a child whose intelligence is beyond gifted (IQ 150 +) than you have to get that kid into an environment where he or she can interact with their peers.

Because an extremely bright child interacting with adults does not necessarily improve their socialization - it's interacting with your peers that improves socialization.






Kirata -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 9:25:45 AM)


Since posts to this discussion have several times referred to IQ scores, it may bear mention that these are meaningless by themselves. If person A scores 145 on test Y, and person B scores 160 on test Z, does person B have a higher IQ than person A? Maybe not. If scores on test Y have a standard deviation of 15, and scores on test Z have a standard deviation of 20, then these two people performed equally well against the average on their respective tests. They both scored at precisely +3 Sigma, three standard deviations above the mean. Only the Sigma score matters, not the IQ.

K.



Moonhead -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 12:35:26 PM)

The main things IQ tests are good for is measuring a certain sort of problem solving that impresses people who design IQ tests, yes. I think the genius level is defined as 165 in that context.
The worrying thing about that is while IQ scores in hindsight have been fiddled to put Voltaire and Johnson over that level, a lot more writers who are routinely and conventionally described as genii don't make it on that level. Which would seem to support your objection to IQ tests, frankly: if Keats and Hopkins aren't genii, but somebody who can do quad equations in their head despite the fact that they drool and gibber if they're required to speak to somebody of the opposite gender is, then it does call the whole scale and criteria used to grade the things into question.



FelineFae -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 1:04:58 PM)

A child gets to decide if he wants to read a book or go to the mall.
A child will suffer if he wants to pursue education over socialization.
This is because the institutes that children are forced into reward socialization and not education.
The unspoken lesson is that it's better to have a resource of humans than to have a resource of knowledge.




Moonhead -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 1:19:07 PM)

Which is true, but doesn't have much bearing on the point I was answering about IQ testing and how the scale's graded for those tests.



cordeliasub -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 1:44:40 PM)

I'll give an example of why the word balance was a good word to use in this discussion. I had a female student named E in fifth grade. E was extremely intelligent and very gifted musically. E was also weird. Sorry, I can't think of a more PC word. E would hide under chairs or tables and bark at the other children when she got annoyed by them. The other kids began calling E "rover." Was that nice? No, and I gave consequences for name calling when that happened. However, let's face it...she WAS crawling on all fours and barking. So...I spent some time with E discussing that perhaps...maybe...possibly...it might be a good idea to learn some mainstream social skills and ways of coping with stress BESIDES barking like a dog.

The reality of the world is that being able to interact successfully with PEOPLE really is generally a better predictor of success than IQ or other measures of intelligence. Honestly, I think the best thing we can do for the odd genius kid instead of giving him a cello and teaching him Russian is to help him learn how to function using mainstream social cues. I have a feeling that this shooter probably was VERY inept with regard to social cues and emotional intelligence, and while I would never blame that for his violence (silly me...I blame HIM for his violence), I do think that it contributed to him being more isolated and maladjusted.



FelineFae -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 2:16:38 PM)

Sorry, Moonhead, i wasn't exactly replying to your statements. my post was more about the overall topic. i just happened to post after you.



Moonhead -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 2:48:48 PM)

No worries, then. You just had me wondering if I'd missed something.

(I'm absolutely with Cordelia on the other.)



Aswad -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 4:35:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

The question becomes how do you properly socialize a child who does not have a natural talent for it?
[...]
It did a great deal for his self esteem and ego development, and was worth every penny.
[...]
Clearly, if you have a child whose intelligence is beyond gifted (IQ 150 +) than you have to get that kid into an environment where he or she can interact with their peers.
[...]
Because an extremely bright child interacting with adults does not necessarily improve their socialization - it's interacting with your peers that improves socialization.


First of all, a big virtual hug for being a good parent and a positive factor in many people's lives.

In kindergarden, I did quite well, socially. Then I went to an elementary/primary school with 50 students per grade, and 2 teachers per grade, with 6 grades at that school. There, it went downhill, because I lost interest in age matched students. At ten years old, I had the mental capacity and much of the maturity of a young adult, i.e. about voting age, but not the life experience. One other student was at such a level as to be worthwhile to spend any time with, and the teachers would socialize when they could, but as you say, that doesn't improve socialization.

If a suitable environment had been available, whatever the cost, my parents would have paid it, because I did not thrive. The Norwegian school system is entirely undifferentiated, unless you have a clear disability, and the doctrine is that the gifted have no needs, being the "strong" ones and thus always able to fend for themselves, without a need for stimulation or peers. Jante Law rules supreme at the social arena, and school is primarily seen as a way to homogenize the population and impart "our shared values and thought patterns", laid out by two oldskool communists at the teachers' academy in the East. Private schools exist, but there are strict requirements to start one, and there are 9 of them covering this grade range, out of 3000 schools total.

In high school, one of the largest ones in this area, I slowly resumed socializing, falling in with a clique ranging from 3 sigma and up, who found each other via BBSes, sort of the predecessor to forums on the Internet (which wasn't really around in any meaningful sense here, back then). There was one average guy in the clique, average except for having an interest in socializing with us, and an open mind. We thought he was retarded, having no idea how bright we were, but we never treated him any differently for it, nor he us. Life was better in the social arena, but the gaps in the academic arena were getting to the point that, by the end, I had almost entirely lost all interest in all forms of learning in all subjects.

Realize that there are a few gifted programmes here, but they're not advertised. By chance, one of my teachers had experience with it, and suggested I apply. Grades are the determinant of getting in, and I had entirely stopped doing any schoolwork at all, barely bothering to show up for class, so my grades were barely adequate and it's hard to get in. The two ahead of me in line for the 28 slots available got deported on account of the situation in their home countries stabilizing (they were born and raised here, but their parents were refugees, not citizens; absurd setup, but that's for another thread). And so I got in.

At that point, I started regaining some interest in life, including learning, and started socializing fully, in a class with gifted students from several different countries. By gifted I mean that, starting from the best, about one third of the class fails each year, not counting those that drop out for being unable to keep up. While regular students went on vacation during the summer holidays, we finally got the time to work on our research assignments instead. I started interacting meaningfully with girls in this programme, and made friends from other cultures, as well as my own. In short, I was back to thriving and had regained a sense of self worth.

However, I had a lot of catching up to do, and had lost a lot of interest in learning, so when I got an offer for an IT job, I jumped at it and moved to another part of the country entirely. I'm not sure that was a wise move, but it's turned out well enough. Still, if the system here had been set up just a little bit differently, I would probably be a postdoctoral fellow by now, and substantially more knowledgeable than I currently am. The choices along the way were mine, but I had no idea what options were available. Had I not run into that one teacher to reveal a carefully hidden option, I might well have been in the news in a very bad way, a long time ago. I was well on my way to turning into a serious problem.

All's well that ends well, yet I can't help but wonder how many kids like me things don't work out for, here.

Perhaps just as well there aren't all that many to begin with.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Aswad -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/19/2012 5:02:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

The main things IQ tests are good for is measuring a certain sort of problem solving that impresses people who design IQ tests, yes.


Meaningful testing is done with a psychometric battery, not a one dimensional IQ test, and scoring is based on sigma or percentile.

quote:

I think the genius level is defined as 165 in that context.


Depending on which of the two main standards you go by, it's either 140 or 180.

I think the former is more accurate in a linguistic sense, basically what the consensus perception of genius is, while the latter is more accurate in a more absolute sense, but neither captures what Hume, Kant, Schopenhauer and others have pointed at, which is dealing with things others don't even realize exist to be dealt with, learning without being taught, dealing with unknowns and working at higher levels of abstraction.

quote:

The worrying thing about that is while IQ scores in hindsight have been fiddled to put Voltaire and Johnson over that level, a lot more writers who are routinely and conventionally described as genii don't make it on that level. Which would seem to support your objection to IQ tests, frankly: if Keats and Hopkins aren't genii, but somebody who can do quad equations in their head despite the fact that they drool and gibber if they're required to speak to somebody of the opposite gender is, then it does call the whole scale and criteria used to grade the things into question.


Or perhaps it calls into question the standards by which you judge the utility of the scale.

The problem with the scale is that it doesn't measure what we need to know.

Hawkings drools a lot, but he's made interesting contributions.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Moonhead -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/20/2012 5:19:32 AM)

Hawking is a cheap shot: we both know I wasn't mocking the afflicted.

I stand corrected about the genius level ruling, though: I was forgetting that there are different grades for linguistic and mathematical genius. That's another example of a lack of practical utility in even the most comprehensive IQ tests, let alone the dumbed down internet questionnaires that are just there to let self styled supergenii have something to feel smug over, surely?



PeonForHer -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/20/2012 6:34:48 AM)

Do geniouses feel seperated from each other, Aswad, do you think?

(Feck. Is there a joke in this thread that I'm missing? Help me, someone!)



Hillwilliam -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/20/2012 6:36:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

Clearly, if you have a child whose intelligence is beyond gifted (IQ 150 +) than you have to get that kid into an environment where he or she can interact with their peers.

Because an extremely bright child interacting with adults does not necessarily improve their socialization - it's interacting with your peers that improves socialization.





Maybe that's what's wrong with me LOL.
I pretty much only interacted with adults unless I was in school.



PeonForHer -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/20/2012 6:28:02 PM)

FR

No answer?

OK then, a request: Could anyone else who wants to tell us all about his/her genius at least spell the frigging word correctly?

God, I find threads like this embarrassing.



Aswad -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/20/2012 7:15:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Hawking is a cheap shot: we both know I wasn't mocking the afflicted.


Never said you were.

I was making the simple point that just because you're completely helpless in some areas doesn't mean you're useless or whatever.

quote:

I stand corrected about the genius level ruling, though: I was forgetting that there are different grades for linguistic and mathematical genius. That's another example of a lack of practical utility in even the most comprehensive IQ tests, let alone the dumbed down internet questionnaires that are just there to let self styled supergenii have something to feel smug over, surely?


As a single number, it's about as useful as the descriptive terms we normally use, like smart, brilliant or genius, which could probably be correlated to the 1~2, 2~3 and ≥3 sigma ranges in people without developmental disabilities and the like. The most comprehensive tests give more than one metric, as noted, and I would say that IQ is about as valid as most of the simplifications and generalizations people throw around (i.e. not very).

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Aswad -> RE: Mental balance as humans (12/20/2012 7:16:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Do geniouses feel seperated from each other, Aswad, do you think?


Do humans feel seperated from each other, Peon, do you think?

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.171875