:)

What is this thing that I am holding?

What is this deformity called?

Is it safe for me to handle it bare-handed at all?

What do I do with it right now?

And the communication difference is that autistic people will tend to occam's razor this by assuming you mean the most simple question. That's an apple, you're holding an apple. If they point at the abnormality and clarify what is THIS that is ON the apple? You may clarify what the deformity is called by its latin name. They ask you what one should do with the apples like this? Well the ancient Phoenicians used to throw them at people whom they thought-

At this point, someone who isn't used to communicating with autistic people is likely to give up and storm off mid-sentence in order to go find someone who is capable of answering the right question from context clues. And for the sake of the example here, the next person is the second type: a neurotypical person who sucks at communicating.

You see, neurotypical people don't assume you mean to ask the most immediate and obvious question, but assess what you are trying to ask from situational context clues. The ones who suck at communicating just suck at doing this. So they may see someone approach, dangling an apple with an abnormality cautiously by the stem, and asking "what is this?"

From knowing that the asker isn't familiar with apple abnormalities, and from the way they're dangling it by the stem like they're afraid to touch it at all, the second person being asked assumes that "what is this?" means "is this dangerous to people?" And will answer "oh it's harmless :)" and won't try to assess whether there could be additional follow-up questions they could also want answers to.

So the asker who still doesn't know what to do with that thing will have to wrangle themselves through trying to guess how to get the right answer to the question they were trying to ask, which is easiest to do by suggesting the answer that is probably wrong but the only one that feels plausible.

"So do I just put this in the same basket with the other apples, like it's a normal apple?"

The strategy is to answer all the questions at the same time while giving all the context

“Thats an apple with (name of the common abnormality and short description of what it does and how it forms and any consequences of eating it) its ok if you just touch it, Phoenicians used to throw them at people. but dont let it touch the other apples or it will ruin the whole harvest. I learned that the hard way (story time)”

What is this thing that I am holding?

What is this deformity called?

Is it safe for me to handle it bare-handed at all?

What do I do with it right now?

And the communication difference is that autistic people will tend to occam's razor this by assuming you mean the most simple question. That's an apple, you're holding an apple. If they point at the abnormality and clarify what is THIS that is ON the apple? You may clarify what the deformity is called by its latin name. They ask you what one should do with the apples like this? Well the ancient Phoenicians used to throw them at people whom they thought-

At this point, someone who isn't used to communicating with autistic people is likely to give up and storm off mid-sentence in order to go find someone who is capable of answering the right question from context clues. And for the sake of the example here, the next person is the second type: a neurotypical person who sucks at communicating.

You see, neurotypical people don't assume you mean to ask the most immediate and obvious question, but assess what you are trying to ask from situational context clues. The ones who suck at communicating just suck at doing this. So they may see someone approach, dangling an apple with an abnormality cautiously by the stem, and asking "what is this?"

From knowing that the asker isn't familiar with apple abnormalities, and from the way they're dangling it by the stem like they're afraid to touch it at all, the second person being asked assumes that "what is this?" means "is this dangerous to people?" And will answer "oh it's harmless :)" and won't try to assess whether there could be additional follow-up questions they could also want answers to.

So the asker who still doesn't know what to do with that thing will have to wrangle themselves through trying to guess how to get the right answer to the question they were trying to ask, which is easiest to do by suggesting the answer that is probably wrong but the only one that feels plausible.

"So do I just put this in the same basket with the other apples, like it's a normal apple?"

Settler violence has gotten so bad that it has been condemned by Mike Huckabee and Netanyahu and his coalition don’t care

Violent settlers are hurting innocent people, thwarting both international and Israeli law, discrediting Israel on the world stage, and serving as an active barrier to peace and a two state solution, and Netanyahu and his coalition don’t care.

The Israeli government has the authority to arrest all of these violent settlers and prevent further settler violence, but they won't because they don't care

[Image ID: that meme of Michael from the Good Place saying "Jason figured it out? Jason? This is a real low point. Yeah, this one hurts.", edited to say "Mike Huckabee" instead of "Jason"]

Bibi would not have a coalition without their support, the only way for him to keep his power was to choose to work with them

And the choice to work with them included the choice to tolerate if not encourage settler expansion and violence in the West Bank

If Bibi takes action against settler violence in the West Bank, the government would likely collapse because Ben Gvir and Smotrich would leave the coalition and Netanyahu would no longer have majority of the seats

This is the Misogyny Corner. If you are anti-feminist you have to sit in this corner and face the concept of Women

Where I post from by the way. Down with Gender!

And finally, the front. I could not fit every flag up there. You can execute me now.

Just killed a guy because he didn't want me to flirt with him #homophobic #myphatasskilledhim

saying Never Again For Anyone is the same as saying All Lives Matter. It's a great philosophy to have, but you can't possibly ignore the original phrase that you are copying. The words you say don't exist in a vacuum. You can't say All Lives Matter without recognizing that you are taking Black Lives Matter and removing the part that made it an important and necessary statement. You can't say Never Again For Anyone without recognizing that you are taking something jewish and adding something that removes its importance and necessity as a statement. This isn't about jews, you're saying. Don't be selfish. This is a trap.

If a jew says that never again is a jewish phrase, they are selfish. They do not care about all the other people who could be using that phrase better than them. They are mean. They must want other people dead! Naughty jew.