AS Women and Relationships

Post Reply New Topic

Ok, I´m back. I´ve been thinking about these ideas of fragmentation and multi-tasking. I am also wondering if I am a "demi-asexual"- (was that the word?) I never thought about it before, I always assumed I was not asexual because I do have sexual feelings, but, as stated, they are often- (most of the time, lately) not really connected with a person. I read recently- in one of the many books I´ve read about sex and relationships- that when women fantasize about sex, they tend to be more emotion based than men, and women tend to fantasize about faces, whereas men focus on body parts. (This was a conventional book, obviously geared for NTs). I realized that I almost never "see faces" when I fantasize; generally, I don´t really care about that....(as opposed to when I feel a romantic but asexual feeling for someone, in which case I have no sexual fantasy- as sex doesn´t enter the picture then- but, in that case, I do like looking at or "meditating" on the person´s face). So for me, this issue is obviously fragmented.

Except, in one instance. I mentioned in my last Post a "great love" that I had, a person I never even knew personally. At the age of 16, I was very sexually attracted to a drummer in a rock band. It was like a magnetic attraction, and I fantasized about him often. At first my fantasies were purely sexual, love didn´t come into the picture at all. Oddly enough, he is the only person I seem to able to fantasize about, if I do fantasize about a specific person- (often I don´t)- and this has been true my whole life. (I´ve even tried fantasizing about other people- tried fantasizing about my boyfriends, when I was in a relationship- but couldn´t).

Although it started as something purely sexual, through a strange turn of events, something happened that I guess enabled me to fuse him in my mind as both a romantic and sexual figure at the same time. One day, while in London I was out walking around when I suddenly saw him; he was stopped at a street across from me, and I knew when the light changed we would be walking towards each other. I had been daydreaming in my own world, and was so shocked to see him there so unexpectedly that I started laughing. Of course, as we walked towards each other I was too shy to speak- my heart was pounding wildly also, I felt like I was about to have a heart attack (it was very distracting, and it surprised me)- but as we passed, he kept looking at me, but trying not to look like he was looking at me. After we passed, I turned around again to look at him- and he was looking back at me too, even as he walked away. I was so shocked to see him looking at me- (and eye contact was much harder for me back then)- that, again not knowing what to do, I just laughed. Years later, I heard a song he wrote about someone he saw smiling across a street, whom he fell in love with. (And judging by the date, he must have written the song around the time that that event occurred). Of course, being an artist myself, I know about creativity and how one can take one event and create a story around it, embellish it, for creative purposes. There is also no proof that the song was about me, but I guess I wanted it to be about me, so I built it up in my mind. For years after that, I went through tortuous relationships and rejections, and I think I just created some kind of fantasy, based partly on that experience and my sexual feelings, so that he finally became a romantic figure as well. I think this is the only time I ever really fused both things, really and truly, in my mind. For years I realized I was "not like other people", and whenever other people spoke about love, or if I watched a movie about it, I would refer back to him to try understand what "love" feels like...this is something I really don´t feel generally, not in this way. (In this case, the love I felt for him was "special-interest level". Most of the time, the attractions I feel for men don´t come up to the level of my special interests).

More thoughts on the attraction process, and beginnings of relationships...(Sorry, I wasn´t online for a few days, so now I have to "get my piece in"... )

I think one problem I have also is that the easiest way I have of connecting with people tends to be through subject matter, or special interests. In my case, this has worked for friendships- I "bond" with people if we have the same interest- but in love relationships, and particularly with the whole dating scenario, there seems to be something else going on that enables people to get together. Even if I were able to flirt well- (I can´t)- that way of interacting would never be enough to enable me to feel anything for a man. Usually, my interest in a man would take the form of an intellectual-type discussion. But men seem to be particularly uninterested in this, at least the ones I´ve met. If a man is interested in me, the first things he wants to do are flirt, or talk about emotions and relationships- (or even general small talk)...all the things that don´t really work with me to feel an attraction. And when I try to speak about subject matter with men, either they are blatantly uninterested, or, if they are interested (rarely), the relationship only stays at the friendship level and never goes further. Whereas many NTs seem to be easily physically attracted to each other, I don´t seem to have any particular physical "type" that I´m attracted to. Many know pretty quickly, with a few looks or one conversation, who they´re interested in. This is not true for me, and I often wondered, back when I was young, if that was some fault of mine.

I also wonder how much attraction- as well as sexual attraction- is based on subconscious, non-verbal cues. Leaving the interaction part aside, as that obviously complicates matters anyway, is it still easier for an NT, who picks up these subliminal cues, to feel sexual attraction because they have more "information", more to work with basically? As all the dating books seem to stress how important these non-verbal cues are in making an impression, it must also be important in receiving an impression. Again, basically what millie was saying about integration and mult-tasking.

Morgana: below, I'll comment on your last message and return to your first one if there's still time.

They seem to be able to banter freely and flirt. Special interest/intelligent conversation can be spontaneous too, but the information is already stored in memory ready to access (barring overload etc.) I can only converse properly with others when it's about particular subjects.



I think women in general feel more bonded to men they can have intellectual discussions with, but for the most part, I don't think their emotional bonds are contingent on this. I know there would be no great bond for me if the person did not interact with me on an analytical level. There would be some bond, particularly if he appreciated my childish side, but nothing very deep. Like you say, they seem particularly uninterested in this. Those that were interested were not sexually interested, so I suppose the others initiated contact primarily out of sexual or romantic interest.

This could also help explain why I would be mute in their company, particularly in the early days. They had no desire for intelligent discussion. Also, being unable to speak in their presence probably reinforced their perception of me as an ornament. In addition, those who were interested sexually or romantically were patronizing, whereas the others were respectful. It really was that noticeable a difference.



Yes, the sideways glance, the coy smile, the slight nervousness, the reading between the lines, the lingering eye-contact ... I imagine they're very powerful signals when picked up on and conveyed well. When with someone, I'll sometimes be consciously looking out for those I've read about and trying to decode them.

Currently, I'm dating a neurotypical boy. We met over the internet, which is how I tend to form my longest-lasting relationships, I find emoticons to be much easier to read than facial expressions, and have an easier time expressing myself in text than I do in spoken words. My boyfriend is wonderful and intrigued by my semi unique situation as a female on the spectrum, without being too intrusive or making me feel like I'm being examined under a microscope (Like a lot of neurotypical people, as well meaning as they are, tend to) I am now comfortable enough with him to talk to him on the phone every day, and we use Skype video chat to see each other, discuss our days, and have a very healthy, happy relationship. We'll be meeting each other face-to-face in two months, which I'm very excited for.
My past dating experiences have been minimal, some downright painful. I've had many instances of one-sided love, where I would feel deep affection for someone, but not know how to articulate it, and sometimes even hurt the person I was attempting to show love and affection for, either by invading their personal space too much, or saying something that unintentionally hurt their feelings or offended them. Now, I've learned to manage my words better and I am less likely to offend people when I speak, but I am happy with my current boyfriend, and he takes my accidental slip-ups in stride, which I'm grateful.

As for me, I can pick up these things if they are clear and obvious enough. Unfortunately, that hasn´t been to my advantage, as I´ve often ended up with men who I´ve felt mismatched with...(too possessive, or overly dramatic or "extreme male"). I have the feeling that the men who I would like the most (like the intellectual type) would tend to be more subtle and reserved about these things, but alas, it´s much harder for me to pick up subtlety. Or, if I think I might have picked up on a subtle flirtation, I´m never really sure- after years of interpreting things incorrectly- so I´m always afraid to answer...(or maybe I can´t even think of an answer). By the time my brain tries to figure all this out, the moment is gone, and I don´t react at all. I think many men just think I´m uninterested and aloof. (In fact, people have told me this). Schade...

sick as a dog the past couple of days, but have to read my fave thread.
am thinking a lot about these issues raised and will contribute again in a day or so.
great to read your long posts morgana.

Sorry to hear you´ve been sick... That´s no fun. I was very sick last month, and now realize I have an intolerance to soy. Ugh.

Now I can´t eat gluten, dairy products or soy...not much left I can eat...sigh. (But that´s a whole other topic).

Hope you feel better soon!

I was thinking about this today, and I wanted to say that I´ve also noticed this; respectful versus patronizing. In fact, I´ve even wondered if, in order for a man to experience sexual desire, it´s almost necessary for him to feel patronizing too? Not that I understand this, I don´t, but as I´ve noticed that this is so often the case, I was wondering. I´m not saying it´s healthy either, it might have something to do with our society, insecurity, machismo or some kind of castration fear. I think it´s strange...I´ve spent a good part of my life trying to understand men, but in terms of love, sex and desire, I just can´t. I´ve read countless books though, not that it´s helped me.

I often felt that when a man "liked me", it was somehow tinged with hate, or at least belittlement at the same time. I find this very uncomfortable. I noticed this way back when I was a little girl. If a boy was mean to me, I assumed he didn´t like me, but parents and teachers would tell me that he actually did like me, and that´s why he was acting like that. This made no sense, and still doesn´t. Maybe it´s my "black and white" thinking...

I hope not and that it was mostly the type we attracted; my partners all patronized to various degrees. But perhaps there is more to it, similar to what you suggested. I wish I'd had some relationships with women to compare this to, though I haven't had many female acquaintances let alone anything closer.



A combination of nature and environment/society perhaps? A lot of the time, I imagine myself as mostly male when others speak to me, which is close to my gender identity. I think being different makes it easier to notice the differences in how men speak to women. A lot of them will see woman first and person second (if ever), as though they are separate creatures. I wonder whether most women do this to men too, even if to a lesser extent.



I remember being told this when a boy was relentlessly teasing me for months. At first I argued that it couldn't possibly be true, but later on it turned out he was attracted to me. It still doesn't make sense. I'm glad most weren't like that.

I'm not sure whether it's one of two things, or whether both are true to a degree:

1) That a lot - not all, but a lot - of men consider, on some level, women to be inferior to them, and so when they find themselves attracted to one, there's almost a subconscious resentment that an inferior person has power over them in this way.

2) That we're interpreting (NT) behavior slightly incorrectly, and what seems to us to be being patronizing is the man in question trying to come over as 'more male', to emphasize the sex difference in order to place the idea more strongly in the mind of the woman in question of him as a potential partner: "Look - I'm not just a person, I'm a man!" I've considered this as a distinct possibility because of the way that most women who are interested in a man will do the same thing on their part and deliberately act 'more female', giggly and flirty.

Actually, you just brought up another point here, something that I´ve also noticed in relationships and learned, over time. And that is, that in a relationship with a man I felt that he almost never actually saw me as me, but rather as "Woman". It seems that people take on these extreme roles- "Man" or "Woman"- and act accordingly. I never did this, I just acted like an individual. Although I do relate to myself as being a woman, I notice that my definition of "woman" seems to differ somewhat from society, so it never seems to be clear to me what people expect as "womanly" behavior. I was often told that I wasn´t "acting right", particularly that I wasn´t acting feminine enough. It´s like there are set modes of behavior and little games people play, that confirm these sex roles, I guess. I don´t really know my "part", obviously...I guess other people do it naturally.

Hovis: good points!- and I also think both of them are true, to varying degrees. Point number 2 is basically like what I just wrote about. Point number 1 is also good, I had never thought about it that way before.

Anyway- back to this Man/Woman idea...I wonder if that´s another necessary ingredient for most people to feel attraction? Hard for me to understand, because it doesn´t really work for me...I prefer seeing people as individuals- but it does seem to be important for the general population. And for instance, when I didn´t "act right"- (i.e., when I didn´t follow my role as "Woman")- it seemed to be very distressing to the men I was with. Most of my relationships- except 1- were disastrous.

Yes, and sometimes they even named me "woman." One person I knew would often preface this with the word silly. They had no idea what I was. Many see gender roles as highly separable.



I've seen examples of the first point; it seems to be a minority who are like this. One example was a male cousin informing my younger brothers they needed to give me a slap to keep me in my place. The second point is interesting and ties in with the current one concerning gender roles. I've noticed the way some females flirt by appearing giggly and air-headed, even if they're smart. I think emphasising the difference between the genders must add to the attraction/chemistry. However, I do think patronizing is an appropriate description in such cases; they are asserting superiority of traits such as intellect and strength. It's mostly in retrospect that I noticed I'd been patronized; in addition, being autistic tends to draw it out of people more.



The man/woman idea is a necessary ingredient for the general population, and has both biological and societal basis. However, there are many men attracted to tomboys; just wish I'd met them. I suspect most people would loathe to live in a very androgynous society because they're constituted to automatically respond to secondary sex characteristics etc. of potential partners, whether they're gay or heterosexual. I would prefer a much more androgynous society, but would still appreciate some gender-type differences.

I agree here. I find a rather androgynous look/attitude to be very appealing, yet the fact that, even as an asexual person, I'm still romantically attracted to men and not to women demonstrates that a person clearly must have something about them that says 'male' to draw my interest. Exaggerated and stereotypically male characteristics I find off-putting, yet at the same time, I doubt I would be attracted to a man who literally behaved like a woman. If one were to imagine the genders on a scale, with 0 representing most feminine, 10 most masculine, and 5 a truly androgynous individual, men around the 6.5 mark would be most attractive to me.

Regarding gender roles, I've wondered if it's a point of interest that athough I enjoy romantic dramas and fiction, my preference within those is for male/male relationships. I feel that one of the (many) reasons is that when both characters are the same sex, automatically dropping into gender roles is avoided, and each partner is forced to relate to and treat the other simply as a person (female/female would achieve the same result, naturally; it's simply a personal preference that I find female characters less interesting).

In my case, it´s hard to say who I´m attracted to, exactly. I don´t seem to go for any particular type. Sometimes I´m attracted to men who are less stereotypically "masculine"- (though, I may hasten to add, my definition of masculine and feminine seems to differ from society´s definition. I have only rather recently become acquainted with the traits people tend to associate with "masculine" and "feminine", as I´ve been paying attention to, and analyzing these things more now...mostly due to my experiences of the past...)

On the other hand, sometimes I am attracted to someone who is very "masculine"- (though NOT obnoxiously so, I´m never attracted to ultra-macho). I guess I really do see the individual first, and it´s even hard to explain why I am attracted to one, and not another. I really don´t know why. But, I have been known to be attracted to manly men also; I guess the difference is, they aren´t "acting" masculine- (i.e., overdoing it and being obnoxious)- they just ARE masculine. I guess, basically, I am never really attracted to someone who is putting on an act all the time, and that is the problem, for me, with these sex-role games. I can be attracted to someone who is "more masculine", or less so...I guess the main point is that I am mostly attracted to people who can be genuine, and can be themselves.

Yes, and I'd add that one of my fundamental requirements for feeling attraction is that the person not be a jerk (though some don't reveal that characteristic immediately). I too don't have a particular physical type and am never attracted to extreme masculine or feminine types. And I don't relate to people (the majority) who are attracted by appearances first.

I'm curious about whether anyone else has this experience: being very attracted to someone and admiring them greatly (this nearly always involves from afar), then a few months or years later being utterly repelled by them. This has happened to me with just about every attraction I've had! I feel even more repelled in their presence than with those I would not have been attracted to in the first place. I can't figure it out. Maybe it's related to existing in the grey area between sexual and asexual.

Yes, most definitely. I have immense difficulty understanding how someone can say they don't actually like a person very much, but still find them attractive. The two things are inextricably linked in my mind. In the case of being attracted to someone from afar, it clearly would not be possible for me to have any in-depth knowledge of their personality, but I would have to at least think that they appeared to also have a nice personality. If that was confirmed to not be true, any attraction would instantly vanish; I would no longer even be able to appreciate them on a coldly aesthetic level.

So although I would say I do have a favorite physical 'type' that is more likely to make me look twice at someone initially, and will enhance attraction once I do begin to feel it, experiencing that active attraction in the first place is absolutely dependent on also knowing - and liking - something about them as a person.