Are aspies better off living in red states or in blue states

Post Reply New Topic

The title of this thread is how I "meant" to name the other thread I created. But unfortunately I didn't name it that way, and people kept acting as if I asked how should aspies vote -- which is *not* what I asked. So here is my new thread with correct title.

The political aspect of it is the question how would an NT holding certain political views would affect the way that NT acts towards an aspie. So the issue here is NOT what views aspie holds, but rather what views NT holds that happens to interact with an aspie.

Anyway, in order not to repeat everything I said about politics, here is the link to that thread: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=379140

But now you have the correct title.

Homosexuality is a far more politicized condition than is aspergers.

In theory a gay person would be more tolerated in a blue state than in a red state for obvious reasons having to with political and religious beliefs that differ between conservative bible belt states and other states.

But there is no equivalent obvious political reasons why an aspie would be more accepted, or less accepted, in one part of the country rather than another that I can see. The Bible has dictates against homosexuality, but not against aspergers.

IF you need some sort of support services and IF you can't pay for them on your own, then theoretically you'd be better off in a Blue State if you can safely assume there'd be a greater willingness on the part of your state to subsidize that support if it's Blue. For example, New York (City) in the days when CUNY was tuition-free for city residents would have probably been more likely to subsidize your support than, say, some place in Texas. But facts on the ground don't always jibe with political stereotypes.

That is the exact thing I was thinking about when I wrote the original post, thank you! What puzzled me is that Mona Pereth told me I am better off living in liberal states when it comes to getting either female friends or a girlfriend. So the question is: why would liberal women accept me better, if Asperger wasn't politicized?

I don't want any accommodations. The question was at which state I would make friends and find girlfriend more easily? Or are you saying that conservatives might "assume" I am getting accommodations -- even though I don't -- and thus dislike me for that?

That's the hell of it. My politics lean more to the Left, but ironically I sometimes get the impression that folks on the Right tend to be friendlier IRL. I basically just avoid discussing politics with anyone I meet. The only real issue (which has absolutely nothing to do with ASD) is if you happen to be a hard-core atheist/secularist then the problem is that most women you meet in Red states tend to be Christians, although they vary greatly with respect to devoutness. In that case, you would have to convince yourself that not sharing religious views is not a deal-breaker (which it shouldn't be unless you happen to be obsessed about it).

Oh yes I really don't think Conservatives would ever make such an assumption. They wouldn't even think about it. I know Trump supporters who don't hesitate to apply for Disability benefits if they believe themselves entitled.

My experience is different. I noticed that back when I used to live in Berkeley I didn't feel like I was shunned the way I felt ever since I left. But then again it is also possible that other factors played a role too, such as

1. I wasn't socially aware about things like "if people won't start conversation with me they are avoiding me" but I became aware about it shortly after I left since someone actually told this to me. So this implies two things:

a) Even if people did avoid me in Bekeley I wouldn't have known it

b) When I finally "did" learn what I didn't know back at Berkeley, I started to obsess about it. Even if I don't express obsession verbally, it might come across in how I act, which would be a turn off.

2. I was a lot younger back when I was at Berkeley, and younger people get more of a leeway

3. I want women to be the ones approaching me -- and conservative women, due to their belief in gender roles, are less likely to do that

4. Back at Berkeley I was living with my mom, so she made sure I took a shower, calmed my hair, cut my nails, tuck in my shirt, etc. After I left I no longer had my mom to remind me to do those things.

5. The 911 happened shortly after I left Berkeley, so maybe 911 just changed people's mentality all across the country.

On a flip side, I have the "opposite" evidence about conservatives being friendlier: I don't have a car and didn't have time to learn how to drive (actually my whole family doesn't drive so its not my Asperger: I can't say that I can't do something if I never tried). But in any case, I normally just walk or call uber or whatever. But when I was in Mississippi the strangers were offering me a ride. Since Mississippi is the only red state I lived in, and I don't remember people offering me rides at any other state, this is an evidence that people in red states are friendlier. But then again, there are alternative explanations for this too. In particular,

1. The only place in Mississippi I lived at was Oxford, which is a small college town surrounded by forests. So due to this particular geography it has very low crime, which is why taking a stranger into a car wasn't as dangerous as it might have been elsewhere.

2. I didn't notice any friendliness "apart from" getting free rides. In fact, I found that I was ostracized in Mississippi just as much as elsewhere. That, plus the people that offered me a ride didn't attempt to extend our interaction beyond that. So maybe offering a ride is just part of their culture. Kind of like if I ask for a time or directions that doesn't amount to real interaction, so maybe in Mississippi offering a ride falls into that same category?

But in any case, leaving all of the above reasons aside, the issue is the following: in one of my other threads, Mona Pereth told me that I would be more accepted in liberal states. In fact she recommended Berkeley before I mentioned to her that I lived there for few years. So how come she mentioned Berkeley as one of the friendliest places -- and was right? So there might be something to it.



Actually I am a Christian -- and I told that to Mona Pereth, too. Yet she thinks I would still be better accepted in liberal states -- despite -- being a Christian.



Well, me personally I am against it. So I know I wouldn't be getting any services unless I face some major crisis that would really push me to the wall -- which didn't happen so far, and I hope never will. I can't speak for others though.

In my opinion, the best places for autistic people to live in are cosmopolitan, culturally very heterogeneous neighborhoods containing people from many different countries all over the world. In neighborhoods like these, you don't have to mask nearly as much as you would have to in a neighborhood dominated by just one or two ethnic groups. In culturally heterogeneous neighborhoods, oddities of body language, tone of voice, etc. don't stick out nearly as much, because there is no uniform standard to conform to in the first place.

Culturally heterogeneous neighborhoods tend to be Democratic-dominated. Republicans tend to live in, and strongly prefer, culturally homogeneous white Christian-dominated neighborhoods.

QFT, please see my reply to you in the other thread.

Here’s my situation:

I am a political centrist, a Lutheran, and love animated sitcoms and traveling. What states would be the best matches given that data?