This may be a teachable moment for both sides.
This is a bit long, but hopefully it will provide some mutual insight.
Literalism is assumed to be rudeness and hostility.
I agree that this is often the case.
For people with ASD, it is helpful to remember that neurotypical people speak "loosely" (i.e., non-literally) quite often. Intentional literalism is often a form of passive-aggressiveness or malicious compliance, and it usually implies hostility toward the target. This often leads to neurotypical people showing a heightened sensitivity to literalist interactions.
In your case, if your intentions are often misinterpreted, it may help to either ask "Is there something I'm missing here?" or to explicitly indicate you are on the spectrum. This will usually prompt neurotypical people to drop their sensitivity to subtext.
For others, it is helpful to remember that people will misunderstand context and metaphors sometimes---not just those with ASD, but also non-native speakers and people raised in different cultures. If the question allows for a person to be genuinely unaware of the context, give them the benefit of the doubt. Be polite, provide the missing context succinctly, and raise any questions about their motivations tactfully.
Precision of language is assumed to be deliberately harmful and we are being told to change our words.
This is often true, and the reason for it says a lot about neurotypical people.
Communication usually involves more than just the literal meaning of the words. This is how things work most of the time in neurotypical social contexts. With some exceptions such as legal and technical documents, it could be considered the default condition for neurotypical communication.
When neurotypical people perceive language as being overly precise for the situation, they assume there is a relevant subtext they must discover.
If people are assuming your language is harmful or hostile, that is something you should know and consider. Polite education or correction is appropriate so that you do not hurt somebody, which can happen regardless of whether you intend to. This applies to everyone who writes a question, ASD or not. Virtually everyone has used hurtful language unintentionally, considerate people try to avoid hurting others, and education is the best way of achieving that goal.
That said, there is an important distinction between telling someone his behavior is rude and calling him a rude/bad person. Answerers should treat the askers as considerate and well-intentioned people unless there is good cause to believe otherwise. Based on my experience to date, failure to behave this way should result in negative votes and/or removal anyway.
One would think that a site dedicated to Interpersonal skills would be more accommodating to those whose very existence is defined by a distinct lack of them.
There will be some practical limitations. Answerers are likely to assume the asker is neurotypical. This site is not restricted to experts, so answerers may not understand exactly what ASD means in relation to IPS.
Neurotypical people without training will have trouble providing answers in some cases; these people may have trouble understanding the challenge behind the question, or they may be unable to formulate an answer that the asker will understand and accept. A forum specifically focused on ASD socialization may be better in those cases.
Disclosing a medical diagnosis is always a personal choice, but in these cases it may be beneficial. It will likely filter out responses from people who feel they cannot respond effectively, and it may elicit interest from people with relevant experience who might otherwise decline to answer.
