The rom com feels

Just basing from the first four episodes, the drama already has so much potential with the theme. The casting is amazing, and I especially love the choices for the female and male lead (who is such a green flag by the way). While it could be said that there were some instances of exaggeration and pacing issues, it still remained as a positive and honest depiction of how autism really is for many who are on the spectrum. Another thing I like about this drama is the honesty. Instead of depicting her as some sort of detached white male savant, her intelligence seems very realistic and according to how human intelligence really does function in real life, unlike some certain depictions of autism in western media. In other words, she's smart and tops her class, but she isn't unrealistically smart.I really hope the creators do this drama much more justice in the rest of the episodes, especially since this drama has so much potential to be on the hall of good K-dramas, especially with the Netflix promo, but with the quality we've seen in the first two episodes, I don't doubt it.

Lees verder

Fun to watch

I finished watching the first four episodes and WOW! WHAT A GREAT SHOW! Park Eun bin puts on a masterful performance as expected. The scene where she's in the courtroom for the first time and she gets nervous so she decides to approach the situation by taking courage and confronting the people who are there telling them to be patient with her because she has autism spectrum disorder but still will. Her, and she will do her best because she loves the law. That scene really moved me! And we are only at the beginning! I also really liked that they included a case with LGBT, which is hard to happen in Korean series. Little by little the characters are winning my heart. I can't wait for next Wednesday. This will give something to talk about, and for good.

Lees verder

Episode 2 feedback re: autism from an autistic

Summary: Like in episode 1, this was a well done episode. No exaggeration. No sensationalized portrayal. No stereotyping.

Detailed feedback:

1. Taste sensitivity.
- Scene: ham was changed in her gimbap

As I mentioned in my episode 1 feedback, autistics have sensory sensitivities and it is both positive and negative. Or to put it another way, it can be blessing or a curse. In this case, it is neither. Attorney Woo simply recognized the ham used was different and she did not like the new ham.

Now, for Attorney Woo this seems to be okay. However, as I also mentioned in my episode 1 feedback, there are varying degrees to each trait per autistic--it does not mean that we have the same degrees of each trait just because we share it.

For some autistics, changing the ingredient may become a "big issue" that neurotypicals usually misunderstand as "rude", "disrespectful", and "finicky"/"nitpicky"/"choosy". If an older autistic reacts this way, most neurotypicals would say the person is acting like a kid.

For some autistics, it also has to do with not being able to handle "changes". While this is more applicable in routines, it can also apply to cases like taste (if the taste and texture are similar; it's possible an autistic may not detect it; but there is no guarantee in that).

So, while our dear autistic attorney was fine with the surprise change in the ham ingredient used and her reaction was simply to remove it and express her dissatisfaction by arranging it in an "x", not all autistics will react similarly. Some may react in a way that neurotypicals will find negatively while some autistics won't even react at all.

From experience, I used to be picky and I won't eat it. But as I grew up, I learned to concentrate on the food and I always think that there are other people who have nothing to eat, this helps me to just eat the food. I'm still picky but this time it is because of health and religious beliefs. But if the taste and texture is really, really, bad …

2. Texture / touch sensitivity.
- Scene: trying out a wedding dress.

Our dear attorney commented that it was like she's wearing a clothes filled with tags/labels. It's irritating her.

This is texture/touch sensitivity and is a common trait amongst autistics. Again, depending on the degree of the sensitivity, for some autistics they can only wear a particular type of clothing. For some, any would do. While for others, all the tags/labels has to be removed, and to others as long as they can not feel the tags/labels it'll be fine.

But, yes, this one is correct.

3. Curiosity and very observant.
- Scene: meeting the client's daughter at her room.

Again, this is true and is a common trait. This is also one reason why autistics hear/see things most neurotypicals can't or don't. Our eyes and attention are always roaming around, taking in our surrounding, automatically processing everything.

In the attorney's case, she's processing the daughter's room in relation to her case. Under normal circumstances, she would more likely comment about so many things. But since she's there for her case, she limited it to within the parameters of her case, like why there are no pictures of her husband.

And when the daughter explained, our attorney pointed out that there is actually a photo of her husband … tucked away in a corner. This was her in attorney mode, analyzing things, trying to narrow down the scenarios already in her head (since she already noticed these things, she still has to ask to narrow it down).

4. Slow to get a joke.

I would say this is a common trait too because the way we think and process things is logic comes first, so once we realize it was a joke, we have a late realization and reaction.

I'm no stranger to this. Eventually, I learned a way around it: instead of reacting with logic/facts, I quickly process it in my head first and try to detect if it was a joke or not. It is not fool-proof, sometimes what I thought was a joke was actually not and I end up offending the person.

Bottomline, it is not easy for us. We do understand simple jokes but the deeper or complex it gets the less we'll understand it and the more we'll get confused.

5. Attorney Choi Su Yeon told litigation Attorney Lee Joon Ho that he should set boundaries on when Attorney Woo can talk about whales.

Okay, so this is something neurotypicals are finding very hard to understand. Most neurotypicals are so concerned they might offend a neuroatypical/neurodivergent person if they tell them to stop or to set boundaries. Or, the autistic might suddenly go "wild" (neurotypical description not mine).

No, we will not get offended. At least majority of us autistics won't. It is actually helpful if you do tell us to stop and if you set boundaries. However, you just need to explain it logically, because this is the way we understand and process information.

In the show, Attorney Woo already understands why she talking about whales should be limited because her father always reminded her of that. Thus, Attorney Lee Joon Ho doesn't need to explain why he's setting boundaries, Woo simply understood it already.

To give another context, in my case, whenever I start talking about something and you stop me because you noticed I'm just repeating myself or going endlessly about it, I take it as a sign that I've been talking forever, like Woo, I just understand it already.

However, again, for some autistics this is not the case and you do have to explain why. Some will probably ignore you and still continue talking, and you really have to be patient. If it won't work, don't force it, try it another time.

Some would probably say this is usually the case for "classic autism" and for those who are "high functioning" (like aspergers syndrome) "you won't have problems". Not true. It is not possible to divide autism into Category A, Category B, Category C. We do have common and uncommon traits but the degrees of these traits are different per person.

Someone who is in the "classic autism" classification may understand "stop" and "boundaries" but in that same classification another will just continue talking and ignore you. The same goes in the "high functioning autism" classification, and I for one knows a lot who will just keep on talking and they're "high functioning".

Bottomline, Attorney Choi Su Yeon is correct. Do set boundaries, we do appreciate setting boundaries, like come on, we set boundaries on getting touched, right? That means we understand what boundaries are for. we just need to understand why, it should make sense, it should be logical.

In Woo's case, it makes sense not to talk about whales randomly and she understood that especially because her father patiently worked with her. (So clue here: support is very important; and I can not stress this enough, support at home. Today, we think of support as attending a 'special needs' school, while there is nothing wrong with that, these 'special needs' does not necessarily fit each individual. If we are different from you, we are also different from each other within the autistic community.)

6. Attorney Woo laughing and was very happy when he saw Attorney Joon Ho "lovestruck".
- Scene: trying a wedding dress.

I can't speak for that. I'll leave that to autistic women.

From my perspective, yeah, we do laugh and enjoy simple things like seeing other people dumbstruck or lovestruck because of us. I mean, we are no different from neurotypicals, we are human beings too. We just think, process, and express things differently. But deep inside, the very basic of everything? We're human beings like you. There are reactions that will always be no different from anyone else.

7. Everytime she was asked to do something during a meeting, she leaves immediately.

I did not explain this in episode 1 but here is why: we take things literally.

This one is also not easy to explain because if I simply say "we take things literally" then one would assume we take everything literally--but that is not the case.

We do think and try to analyze things however, there are some areas where we automatically take things literally because it does make sense to … well … take it literally. Like in this show, she was told to write a report/statement, so off she go to do just that.

In some cases, especially in the real world, the 'boss' of the meeting would probably stop the person from leaving and ask "where are you going?" And the person would reply, "you told me to do this and that". The 'boss' would probably reply with, "are you mocking me?" or "are you serious?" or something along those lines. The autistic person would be dumbfounded because at this point, the person wouldn't know how to process things. #1 the person is now already aware s/he did something wrong; and #2 if they say more, they might make things worse.

For most neurotypicals, they understand this as "do it after the meeting". But not so for autistics, especially for those working for the first time.

If you see a team member or a subordinate acting this way, be patient. More likely than not, they are autistic and they either chose not to disclose it; or they do not know. If they are not autistic in anyway, then they are probably intentionally doing it … and that's a different discussion.

Can we tell which things autistics will take literal? Nope. Like how each trait have varying degrees of effect; we also have different things that we take literally. For some autistics, if you tell them to "wait here", they will literally wait wherever here is, and they'll probably still be there the next morning.

For some autistics, if you tell them to "wait here", they'll wait for an hour or two but then realize something is wrong or they were dupe. For some, they'll understand it immediately as "let's break up"/"end it here" or "don't follow me".

If it comes to lovers quarrel, well, that makes it even more complex and confusing. I think even neurotypicals / non-autistics will be confused in a lovers quarrel scenario. If you've ever experienced this, when your girlfriend tells you to "wait here" or "stop following me" when what she actually wants is for you to follow her--but she gets angry if you follow her--so you don't know what you'll do. YEAH, that exactly is how we autistics feel and think.

We end up with doing what is more logical, considering all other factors. For example, if someone tells Attorney Woo that she should not leave a meeting when she's told to do this and that … even though she will take "do this" literally, she will consider what she was told before and will stay.

Like in a lovers quarrel, if the girlfriend/wife got angry when the boyfriend/husband followed her, the next time he won't follow. (But the girl will be angry again because he did not follow.) Good thing, real life isn't a lovers quarrel so it's a little bit easier to choose.

---

I guess that's it for episode 2.

I can't wait for episode 3 because they are going to tackle an autistic trying to help an autistic with a different degree of "autisticness" (if that is even a word). I'm seeing that episode 3 will demonstrate what I meant by having common and uncommon traits but each trait have varying degrees of 'effect' on an autistic.

Lees verder