Failure to develop peer relationships appropriate

Post Reply New Topic

I was always known as the odd type, I get anxious and shy when I meet new people...
I was bullied alot for trying to make friends with normal teens, I was so unpopular with the girls which they used to call me gay which I didn't know why, since then i became more scared to make new friends. I hardly talked... Which I'm still kinda like that. And I would ocassionally cry or just run into my corner in silence, lol.
Now I just don't care what negative things people say, or try to not show it. I rather prefer being in a small group of friends who I feel comfortable with rather than a whole massive group... And most people I know id just prefer them as aquaintances.

In elementary school I had a few friends, though I don't know how. I don't remember how we started spending time together or why. They didn't particularly interest me. I liked speaking to my teachers though.

From 7th grade through 10th I hung out with another socially isolated girl (she was deaf). We didn't really have a lot in common and spent most of our time talking about what other people were doing and how we didn't want to join in (I really didn't, I think she did but no one else knew sign language).

My last couple years of high school and throughout college I had a few people I spent time with, some just due to proximity in the dorm. My roommate and I spent a great deal of time together. I think the relationship worked well because she was controlling and I complied (it was easier than trying to figure out what to do!)

As of now I am closest to my sister. We share a house and have many similar interests, though I have been spending more and more time alone in my room. A couple of my co-workers consider me a friend. I do do a lot of the actions expected of a friend ie helping them with their issues, helping them move (SEVERAL TIMES!! ), gone to events that were important to them, etc...They are nice enough but (as with most people) it wouldn't bother me if I didn't hear from them.

And to reply to a previous post, I am forced to dumb down my speech and conversational topics around pretty much everyone in my life (my immediate family being the exception). It makes social conversation even more trying for me because I have to rethink my word choice to make sure it is at an appropriate intellectual level.

A husband/wife is generally considered the ultimate peer relation to professionals (well, any long term relationship in person).

But, is having only that one intense peer relationship really "appropriate to developmental level"? Normally functioning adults are generally able to have a broader social network than just one person they happened to stumble upon and get along with. The criteria would just say "lacks peer relationships" and leave it at that if it meant none at all. But, it adds the part about being appropriate to developmental level, which, to me, adds a whole lot to it. Having acquaintances and no actual friends isn't an example of having relationships appropriate to your developmental level, and having only one friend that you cling to isn't an example of having peer relationships appropriate to developmental level either.

I agree with that - it doesn't seem quite right to call a single relationship ordinary, because it isn't, and the criterion is relationships, plural.

Exemplary, my dear Watson!

I can't ever remember having a 'best friend' or even someone that would been called a friend by a neutral observer.

There was a brief time in High School when the 'top of the year' group (there were 7 of us) played bridge together (almost non-stop), even met up socially (mostly drinking) but that was it. The connections were really just intellectual (apart from the fun of underage drinking)

There are a few (and I mean less than a handful) of people that I do spend time with occassionally. We do discuss things of 'substance' and I enjoy their company but I don't feel as though I have really progressed beyond the stage of establishing polite rapport and determining that we have some common 'interests'.

It is usually me calling them if we do meet up That was always a constant feature of my efforts at 'friendship'


My wife is a really sociable and lovable person and in my less self absorbed moments I can see that she has sacrificed a lot for me.

I saw a movie where someone said, 'You are everything I need and more than I deserve'

That's my wife

I think it can be different for females though. I see a lot of ladies on the board who are married but dont have friends... I think friends are harder for females because other females being the appropriate peer level friends to aspie females, can demand a lot of social skills.

They actually say it's rarer for females with HFA/AS to have a partner, and that it's the borderline males who have a good job are the ones who tend to have one (barring statistical outliers).

Anyway, the difficulty involved in maintaining a long-term relationship by itself is oftentimes too much for "normal" people; it's the hardest form of social interaction. It's why so few with diagnosed AS don't have a partner, and never will (it was 1 to 2% when they introduced AS in the DSM-IV-TR; it might be higher now; it's effectively 0% for those with HFA/LFA). Even just this by itself is "appropriate", as there's many, many "normal" people who only have their partner as a friend. These normal people could make friends like anyone else, of course, but they don't; it's perfectly normal.

"Friends" is far easier for the individual with an ASD from everything I've read, and considering how that hard is itself....

(Of course, I can give sources for this information. I, recite facts like a calculator.)

Can you provide a reference for that study. I remember you once referred me to Wing in the book on HFA, but no particular study was cited there.

'Failure' here is a very dangerous word.

I've had people use 'failure to develop relationships to the appropriate peer development level' on me and it hasn't helped me at all. It's been thoroughly counterproductive.

They assumed that because I'd supposedly 'failed' at relationships, that I was going to fail at academic things too. Not so.

Let's look at this word 'failure' again.
I don't think that I completely 'failed' at having friends.
I had a few when I was young, because I allowed them to approach me first and make friends with me. Because I didn't approach them first or seem 'threatening' many of them were happy to be friends with me.

Also when I was a bit older.

When I let people approach me and be friends with me on their own terms, they tended to be much more sympathetic and understanding.

Again I wouldn't call these 'typical' friendships, but they were friendships and people were grateful when I helped them out with various issues.

There are understanding people who will be friends if you let them approach you first.

I also had more acquaintances than most people did.
I think that I'm wired up to engage in many low-key relationships and help people out on a one to one basis. I don't think that my mind likes being in one place for too long or spreading nasty rumours or gossip about people.

It's unfair expecting people to 'clique up' in the conventional manner when their wiring might mean that they are more comfortable casually wandering round and letting other people pick them up as friends on the way. This is how I made most of my friendships.

At a gathering, I'd answer people's questions and quietly stand alone for most of the time. I think that there was another thread on here that described this type of socialising. And yet, this style of socialising is now deemed 'pathological' or not 'appropriate'.

People are also very rigid in their expectations about how girls should socialise.
Why can't they be more relaxed about the whole thing?

Why aren't people more open to different styles of friendships?
I am.

That's why it's so hard for me to make and maintain friendships.
I seem to have one standard and method and other people seem to have a different one.

If I approached anyone first though, people would bolt.
Which is why I think that I was doing something involuntary non-verbal that people had a fearful gut reaction to. People tend to avoid what they fear or don't understand.

If people are approached by someone with an 'odd' or 'blank' expression, I believe that they are frightened because they cannot read this facial expression easily. I think it's a bit like coulrophobia (fear of clowns). Some people fear clowns because they cannot read the facial expressions through the make-up, or they perceive the facial expressions as 'odd' or 'unexpected'.

This is why I think some of the 'blame' should be placed on other people's gut reactions and avoidance of the AS person. I think that this a gut and survival instinct based reaction.

I therefore think it's unfair to ask someone to try and form relationships to the typical standard or judge them as a 'failure' where something involunatry might be preventing them from doing so. It's like having few friends and someone kicking you in the stomach saying:
'Haha! You have no friends, you're a failure.'

As an analogy, it's like telling someone with a damaged leg to run a marathon on foot and then kicking them down when they've 'failed' to run. When the person could've been given a wheelchair, or an alternative route and completed the marathon that way.

It doesn't help anyone productively. It just gives the person who says 'you're a failure' an ego boost.


Think about a traditional doctor or witch doctor.
People approach him or her seeking help and advice first, not the other way around.
I just wonder if some people's brains are pre-wired for this kind of social activity, perhaps at the expense of 'cliquing up'.

Actually, I'm starting to think that the masks and make up witch doctors wear may have been to cover up any unnerving non-verbal signals they were inadvertently sending out, or maybe make these 'blank' or 'odd' expressions seem more like part of the costume.

I often wonder about my own glasses or some of the lab goggles I've worn. Perhaps these are like modern day 'masks' as well as safety/sight aids. I've sometimes felt more comfortable hiding behind the 'mask' of my glasses than I have wearing contact lenses. I've often felt more exposed wearing contact lenses, almost as if a different set of cultural expectations were being placed upon me for not wearing glasses.


Who decides what's 'appropriate' anyway?
What's appropriate in one culture may be deemed inappropriate in another.
Different people have different temperaments and levels of intra/extraversion, so expecting others to be able to integrate in the same way isn't fair.
What about variation?

Yes it maybe difficult for people to make friends, so how about helping them and supporting them rather than telling them that they're a 'failure'?

Not everyone is the same and not everyone will socialise in the 'expected style'.
It's time people realised this and were more flexible.

If I were writing the criteria I would rephrase this statement because it ruined other people's opinion's of me during my childhood.

Because people concentrated on my 'failure' to form friendships in the way they expected, they tended to ignore all of my unconventional friendship successes and academic achievements.

Just the book. However, Wing provides all of the sources at the end of her chapter (there's a couple of pages of citations).

(At first, I thought that females would have it easier in regards to such, but thinking about it, and from my observations of people, males tend to be very judgmental of social behaviour (which is bad for the AS female if they want a relationship), whereas the male with AS will appear somewhat...mysterious to the normal female, who'll see him as unlike all of the other males (the normal female will also see that she can teach the male with AS how to improve socially; this is usually where the relationship is made long-term or broken, as she'll find that he can't change).)

Of course, I can see how certain circumstances can fall into place for the female with AS (some say that severity and outcome for people with a very similar condition are more defined by the external environment than innate differences, so people with a similar level of ASD are more affected by the same external sources).

Several people have pointed out that there are many women that are dxed with AS that are on the forum, and that's just a small sampling of of the AS population. I think it would be easier for an AS woman to get married, than a man. Men are usually the one that approaches the woman, for one. Also, my way of thinking is quite male-like. It makes it easier for men to get along with me, because I'm more like them. I'm still somewhat feminine, but my interests, and ways of thinking are mostly not. Also, I am married to someone that in all probability has ADD, along with dyslexia. With my (suspected) NLD, his weaknesses are my strengths, and vice-versa. As far as day to day living goes, I don't think either of us would function well separately. Our marriage has almost ended several times, because of my lack of attention, affection, and just the basic reciprocity that a spouse usually gives. He says I'm aloof, neglectful, ect... Truth is, I care deeply for him, but I can't always show it the way most do.

I also agree with ColdBlooded . Is a single relationship dev. appropriate? Just because I happened upon one person that I can connect with does that really exclude me from having AS? I also have to wonder if the stats aren't a little shaky due to the high rate of undxed females. You can't get a very clear picture of an AS female, if many aren't even dxed.

I guess that I will find out soon enough if I do fit the criteria when I go to get evaluated in December. Right now, I'm still researching, and thinking of things that I'd like to write down for the psychologist. I don't want to leave it up to me speaking, because I freeze up when I try to answer questions on the spot.

I think it's more likely that females would look for such a community than males; women tend to be more social, and there's that desire to be a part of the pack. It seems - and these are just personal observations, not studies, so take of it what you will - that females in general (spectrum and otherwise) tend to want to be validated by having peers who are similar. I notice a lot of posts around here about wanting (and not having) friends are made by females. The males tend to post about lack of a SO, but not friends.



I don't know. Daniel made a good point up there about how quiet men can be mysterious to women, and there's more freedom these days for women to approach men. If a woman who is approached is quiet, it's not really a big deal. There's lots of quiet women who don't approach guys, whereas a quiet guy who doesn't approach females is more of a rarity. It might not be common, but it does happen, and if a woman is intrigued enough, I could see her doing it. Plus, I'm not so sure that AS men don't approach women; there are posts about them doing such in other parts of the forum. It might not work, but doing it more and more will make for a better approach (in theory, anyway), and eventually they might come upon one who is more quirky.

In the end though, it's not about who gets dates easier; it's about who stays in a relationship long term, especially to marriage. And I could see it being harder for a female to get to that point. To some extent, social expectations still hang on, and while it can be more acceptable for a man to be cold and distant, maybe involved in his career or off in his own interests, it's not quite as accepted for females. Females are thought to be nuturing and warm, and to have one that doesn't fit those qualities... It's not to say that there won't be any guys who would accept that, because obviously there are, but there are fewer.

As for male like thinking... I know some men would consider that to be a turn off, and some who wouldn't. I don't really think it's an advantage or a disadvantage.



This is what I really wonder about. Of the stats for marriage/long term relationships in the spectrum, how many of the partners are not nuerotypical as well? I'd guess that the majority would be involved with someone who had a mental disorder as well. I suspect that some relationships between two non-NT people are different enough to be perhaps not be considered an appropriate peer relationship, at least in terms of diagnosing.



I don't think the rate of undiagnosed females is really all that high. Even with the spike in dxs (because of more awareness and the addition of AS to the book in the 90s), the ratio remains about the same, with boys outnumbering girls by quite a bit. The number is pretty equal around here (although it does appear to be more males), but you have to keep in mind that females do seem more likely to seek out a group like this.

Also, not all of the females around here are diagnosed. I know self-diagnosing is kind of the trend - and it's understandable in some cases, because not all mental health professionals will recoginze or point it out - but it's also skewing the numbers here. I'm not bashing on self-diagnosing; I wasn't officially dxed until last year, and I had identified with AS since I first heard about it (a month before I joined this site). Thinking about it, it does appear that more females around here are self-diagnosed than males, but I'm not sure, of course. But I think that without going in for an evaluation, the diagnosis is too subjective to be considered in the numbers.

For instance, I know of several people - male and female - who have gone to a professional, and they've been told they have this, this, or this, but they're not on the spectrum. And sometimes it is the professionals, yes, who are wrong, but not everytime. I remember advice being given on here to a person who had gone and been told he didn't have it that he should go to as many professionals as it took to get the diagnosis, whether it was "one or 21". At some point, you need to stop and realize that maybe it really is something else, but it's like some people cannot do that. I can think of one who was so clearly not on the spectrum; there was something different, yes, very different, but it wasn't AS. Actually, I can think of two, and both were given dxs that were far more appropriate (at least based on the behavior they displayed here), but both refused to accept that they weren't on the spectrum. So do you count someone who's been told no multiple times but continues to believe yes anyway? It's why dxing (can you tell I'm faking it everytime I don't know how to form that word? I can't figure it out properly) is so important.

My best friend is 10 years younger than me. We started becoming friends when I was 24. This was a long time before I knew anything about AS. I'd say that 24yo's becoming friends with 14yo's isn't very normal. When I was younger most of the people I became friends with were older than me.

Wow, thanks for the long detailed post, Rainsong. I appreciate it. Okay, to answer you... (I apologize for not replying in the neat quotes that you used, but I don't have enough time to do that right now, and it always gets all messed up when I do it.)

I think you may be right about women gravitating toward a forum like this, more so than men. I have a brother that I'm absolutely positive is on the spectrum, but he has no desire to come here, or anywhere else for that matter to talk about it.

The qualities that you listed about females is precisely what has caused problems in my marriage. Though, I do take care of my household, as I am a stay at home mother, I do not reciprocate the feelings of love, and warmth toward my husband. Our relationship is quite backwards, as he's more cuddly, affectionate, romantic, ect... He has threatened to leave me several times over the years, because I "neglect his feelings" in favor of special interests, don't socialize well with his group of friends, and I don't demonstrate all the nonverbal cues that tell him when I'm happy. He interprets my lack of these social cues, and lack of facial expression to mean that I'm not happy with him.

I don't know about how many women self-diagnose on here vs men. I don't check profiles very often, unless I feel that I need more info. Though, I don't want this thread turning into another self-dx debate, yes I have seen the people that you're talking about. I know of at least one that went to a professional, and they said no, gave them a different dx, and everyone told them to go get another opinion. I could tell that this person wasn't on the spectrum to begin with by the content of their posts. I couldn't believe that people were telling them to go to 'as many as it takes' to get diagnosed AS. When I go to get evaluated if she tells me no, and I feel that she is knowledgeable, and thorough I will take her on her word that I do not in fact have AS. I will also come back here, and change my status to NT parent of kids on the spectrum. Though, if I do get a negative for AS, I hope I get a postive for something to help me understand why I am the way I am.

Half of which was off topic. Don't worry about the quotes; to be totally honest, I only quote things because I forget what I'm talking about otherwise. I'll literally stop typing mid-sentence because I've forgotten. I'm skipping your middle paragraph, because I'm afraid I don't know how to respond to it, sorry. I'm not very good with personal issues.



Yeah, I know what you mean. You can pretty much trace a line through my family of who is on the spectrum, and I talked to my father about it, because I'm almost positive he's on it as well. He was super interested, but is he going to do anything? Absolutely not. Of course, this is the man who waited until a couple of blood vessels to burst in his eye before going to a doctor for the first time in years, so really, that's completely in character. I didn't even bother bringing it up with my grandfather; his heart attack, kidney disease, liver disease, etc was all "just getting old" and he was completely fine, darn it.



I usually check new ones, because invariably I'll call people the wrong gender unless they have a picture (and even then, it might be a picture of some character or something, so it's best to check). Of course, they're not always accurate; I know of at least two people who put diagnosed when it was really self, and another who cycles through all of the options apparently randomly. It's just something I've noticed though; when a new male joins, he's usually got diagnosed down, whereas the new female usually has self.



Yeah, sorry about that. It really doesn't matter what the original topic is about, because I'll find one quote that might as well be sparkly, because I always respond. I have a tendency to derail without even realizing it, so if you see me corrupting it, a gentle prod should usually get me back on track. So I'll skip the rest except to say:



You have a very good attitude.