>

I never talk to myself out loud
I could have a dialogue in an empty room, and I would be both the listener and the speaker, sure. But it would be a very boring dialogue, because I would always know what the reply to each message would be, since I'm the one generating the replies. In fact, doesn't this mirror the etymology of monologue and dialogue? A monologue is a conversation with a single participant, and a dialogue is a conversation between multiple participants. So by definition, an inner monologue cannot be a "dialog inside my head" - because to have a dialogue, you must be able to identify two separate participants. 
There is one exception when I will talk to myself: when I want to slow things down in order to solve a problem. For example, when diagnosing a bug in a program, or planning how to express an idea in some syntax (code, or language). In these cases, I will make an effort to explicitly "talk to myself" because I want to slow down my rate of thinking in case I'm missing something by skipping over it. 
An inner monologue is a low-bandwidth way of thinking through concepts. Does this mean you're limited to the rate of expression allowed by your first language? 
I think the best way to expose the error in "inner monologue" is to ask: What is you inner monologue saying right now? You likely cannot answer this question precisely, because any answer you give will more accurately be an answer to a different question, namely "what do you want to reply to this comment?" or "what did that last sentence remind you of?" Your "current thought" will always be a response to some external stimuli. You might explain it in terms of an inner-monologue, but I contend you are not experiencing it that way.
You stated in the post that your refuse to believe otherwise. In which case it is pointless to respond to this post. >

Pretty sure that’s a rule break too. >

Yup >

well i take it back >

Tell it to the judge!!! Also… maybe act like it in your replies >

Some people don't have an inner monologue, but the rest of us do. Maybe you're in the group that don't? >


I refuse to believe that it's neurotypical to have voices talking to you inside of your head

But that's not what an inner monologue is. No one is talking to me. I'm talking. It's my monologue. It's faster than I can say aloud, but if I did it wouldn't be "voices talking to me" it would very clearly be me speaking. >

but then who is you? your monologue or the one listening to it? >

Who is you when you talk aloud in an empty room? You're both the speaker and the listener.
Do you ever literally talk to yourself, btw? I rarely do, but sometimes. And I think that's a way to understand that it's not "hearing voices" or two different parties.