Empathy in the context of a conversation isn't retrospective analysis of your actions. It's the immediate sharing and understanding of emotions in a moment. You did not consider her emotions at all in your interaction. She did not consider that you might not follow the same social contract as everyone else. Those two things are not the same.

Empathy is a skill high-functioning people on the spectrum can learn. I spent a lot of time in therapy as a child pretty much solely focused on learning empathy. Your behavior showed a complete disregard for her emotional well-being and _her feelings_, which is synonymous with a total lack of empathy. That you are capable of commenting on Hacker News and getting married means you could learn the skill too; everyone has to learn it, like any other skill, and it doesn't come easy to people on the spectrum.

I understand the double empathy problem and I do not agree with it whatsoever. My exposure to adults on the spectrum who wear their autism as a badge of pride or disclaimer in conversation do so as a means to dodge responsibility for their part in a social interaction because it makes them uncomfortable.

> Finally, where's your empathy for me in your comment?

Doesn't feel good to have your intellectual / personal short comings aired out in public does it?

> What does that make you?

Speaking how you speak to others, but to you. As a narrative decision.

I think right here, right now, you are engaging in the exact same behaviour you are accusing me of engaging in – where is your "immediate sharing and understanding of emotions in a moment" in the context of this conversation? Are you considering my emotions at all in your interaction with me?

Also, you weren't actually there, so you don't know exactly what I said or what she said–I mentioned the gist of the message, but no details on exactly how it was conveyed–which obviously makes a significant difference. You are drawing a lot of conclusions based on very limited information.

> Empathy is a skill high-functioning people on the spectrum can learn.

Have you actually learned that skill? Of course it would be unfair to judge you on the basis of a single interaction – but you aren't demonstrating any of that skill here.

> Speaking how you speak to others, but to you. As a narrative decision.

I don't go around calling other people "dicks" or "assholes", especially not directly addressed to them, but to be honest I don't even use that kind of language in the third person. (I suppose I did suggest that maybe your abusive language directed at me could possibly be better applied to you, but I said that more in the hope that you would see the contradiction and withdraw it, rather than because I think you actually deserve to be called that). Nor am I prone to draw conclusions about other people, such that they have a "total lack of empathy", based on their brief descriptions of social interactions which I didn't personally witness, and hence couldn't possibly have a complete picture of. I think the way you and I speak is actually quite different, and a lot of the flaws which you are accusing me of having, your own behaviour actually exhibits them much more than my own.

I have the sense things I have said have triggered an emotional reaction on your part, and a lot of what you are saying is really more about your own emotions than about anything I have said.

> I think the way you and I speak is actually quite different, and a lot of the flaws which you are accusing me of having, your own behaviour actually exhibits them much more than my own.

> I have the sense things I have said have triggered an emotional reaction on your part, and a lot of what you are saying is really more about your own emotions than about anything I have said.

You're so very close to getting it. This entire interaction has been incredibly frustrating to you, because I engaged in it in bad faith from a place of (supposed) irrational emotional anger, same as you described. I called you out on a personal failing, and it caused you some level of frustration or hurt. Even when I have over-emphasized the point and flipped the tables, you're still not getting it. You treated that poor lady horribly, more horribly than I have treated you (unless you really think a random curse word on the internet is more devastating than being told in as many words, to your face, that you're too stupid to do your job, which is what you described your interaction as) and you're ready to back out of this interaction. The tables are reversed and you think I'm an asshole. What do you think that lady thinks about you?

> because I engaged in it in bad faith

You claimed before that "She did not consider that you might not follow the same social contract as everyone else" – but isn't your own (self-confessed) bad faith engagement here a violation of most people's social contract, and especially the social contract of this site? (Read the Guidelines.)

> unless you really think a random curse word on the internet is more devastating than being told in as many words, to your face

You are making assumptions. Was the interaction in-person, via email, via phone? I haven't said. You can't really judge an interaction you know nothing about except a very brief description. Our interaction here is as much "to your face" as any email exchange would be–given which, your ideas about what differences exist between the two interactions are very questionable.

> that you're too stupid to do your job

How is it telling someone "you're too stupid to do your job" to point out they've got the facts about something wrong, and that you've got concrete evidence to substantiate that?

I mean, if a colleague tells me I'm wrong about X, and shows me something which proves I'm wrong – I don't interpret that as "you're too stupid to do your job". My response is "thanks for enlightening me". In fact, just a few weeks ago I was telling people "Cassandra can't do X" (I forget exactly what X was now) and one of my colleagues said "no you're wrong" and sent me some blog post pointing out how to do that thing with Cassandra. I was thankful to him for correcting me, I didn't take his correction as having any implication on my own intelligence or ability. Sure, being shown to be wrong feels somewhat uncomfortable, but adults should be able to handle that feeling. And it wouldn't matter if it wasn't a colleague – such as a customer, or a complete random stranger.

> The tables are reversed and you think I'm an asshole.

As I said, I don't like language like "asshole", I generally avoid it. But, what are you doing here? You think I behaved inappropriately in a situation – possibly you are right, possibly you are wrong, you don't really know enough about it to actually judge – and so you think that by behaving inappropriately to me you are going to convince me of something? Whatever you are trying to do, I don't think it is thought through very well, and I'd question its compatibility with this site's Guidelines.

> What do you think that lady thinks about you?

How would you know what she thinks? You've never met her. I've actually spoken to her quite a few times in the years since that event, and (as far as I can tell) the interactions have been positive, and (other than that one occasion) I can't remember her seeming upset about any of them. (None of our subsequent interactions have involved anyone disagreeing with anyone else's facts, for what it's worth.)