Are women blind, or super-vigilant, or both?

Post Reply New Topic

It is not necessarily a proof that you care in any way she wants you to care about her.

In an earlier thread you talked about women taking 'I don't care' serious whereas you considered you getting angry enough to use the phrase evidence that you do care.
In one of the examples, you mentioned where this happened, you weren't angry about her but only taking your anger about something else out on her. So you were angry - not about her - and that's why you wanted to hurt her feelings. Technically wanting to hurt someones feelings is caring about how they feel - but it is not the kind of caring about how they feel they want from you.
You provided several other examples where you said you didn't care that actually implied that you care about something. They weren't all as bad as that one. However, none of them implied caring in a positive, non-selfish way.
That you care in the broadest definition of the word just isn't enough for them to want to be in a relationship with you and sometimes your 'caring' isn't even a positive thing.

@QFT watch this video. The girl is very helpful

Most men get ignored by most women on dating sites. That's normal.
Maybe it's due to spelling or word usage in some individual cases. But it's certainly not all or most women who ignore you.


Because what you consider to be over-analyzing doesn't actually take them any time or effort. They just get a different impression without actively thinking about your word choice.
(If that's the reason why you got a faster reply and it wasn't just by chance, which could be if it happened just once)


Yes, what you write on your profile can matter, if they're not rejecting you based on your pictures. But they don't put any major effort into over-analyzing your wording. It's just the impression they get. And it's only ridiculous in so far that online dating profiles don't work well for judging someones personality anyway.

Well stated.

The pattern I see over and over again ever since I first logged in to this website is that some men seem to believe they can behave badly, openly express anger, have nothing to offer, and still expect women to fall madly in love with them.

That may not be true in every case, but it sure seems that way.

When I was talking about yelling at women over things that have nothing to do with them, I said I did it to *some* women, I didn't say all. In terms of the four examples that I listed, the only one that falls into that category is Example 2 (and still only half way since my anger happened few days "before" the described misunderstanding). But as far as the woman in Example 3, no she didn't fall into that category. In her case I was actually angry at her. Now, if I am angry at something else and just use her as a punching bag, then I can see how it indicates I don't care. But if I am actually angry *at* the woman in question (as happened in Example 3) then it means I do care -- or else why would I be angry?

But lets go back to the other things you were saying. So your point that I might care but not "in the way" that a woman wants me to care about is valid (I am not saying I agree or disagree with it, just something valid to think about). However, I don't see how this is relevant to Example 3. Because you see, in Example 3 she didn't say "I know you say you care, but maybe you care about a different aspect of it". Instead she said "look at your own words, you said you didn't care". So I don't see how the issue of the word choice relates to the issue you are talking about. So since what she actually said was in reference to the word I used as opposed to her own thoughts about the situation, thats why I have an objection that I do.

Let me put it this way. So what you are basically saying is that she defines the word "care" in a different way than the way I define it. So when I say "care" I mean "care about X". When she says "care" she means "care about Y". So basically -- in your scenario -- I say yes I care because I care about X and she says no you don't, because I don't care about Y. But if I look at what actually happened that doesn't make a lot of sense. She relied heavily on my own use of the word "I don't care" to back up her point. But -- since I was the speaker when I used that word -- I used it in a way that I define it. In other words, *if* what I said were to be taken literally, then "I don't care" would be referring to X -- and I thought you said that everyone agrees I care about X. So if "I don't care" refers to X, why would it even be relevant in triggering her concern with regards to Y? Thats why it doesn't really seem like she has a concern regarding Y; rather it just seems that she simply jumped at the word I used.

And in case of Example 1, its the same thing. If she was concerned about my employment, that would be a valid concern. But the point is that she just jumped into the word "hide". I know you said that -- in your opinion -- the word hide wasn't the main thing. But then why did she quote me using that word?

Last edited by QFT on 23 Sep 2020, 4:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Expressing one's anger in an intimidating way around women is a sure way to drive them off.

It's one thing to say, "Every time X does Y, I feel anger toward him."  You are simply stating a fact.

It's another thing to raise your voice, clench your fists and shout "Every time X does Y, I want to rip his guts out and stuff them down his throat!"  That's communicating a threat, and directly implies that you would willingly commit a violent act if provoked to anger.

Most (all?) women who want a man in their lives expect that man to feel anger (but only for the right reasons), and to act on their anger in socially-acceptable ways.

If the woman in Example 3 were to say she had a problem with my anger, that would make sense. But the problem is that this is not what she said. She said her problem was that I said I don't care which must mean I don't care. And this part doesn't make sense.

So, to combine what you said, what NorthWind said and what Woman in Example 3 said, it is like this. There are three separate concerns one might have

Your concern: I have anger issues

Northwind's concern: I do care but I care about the wrong thing

The concern of the woman in example 3: I don't care because I said I don't care

So both your concern and Northwind's concern makes sense, but the concern of the woman in example 3 does not.

If it is the scenario you are concerned about, then the person in that scenario cares, they just have anger issue. Sure, nobody ever said that anger problem is less serious than the problem about not caring (could easily be the opposite). But it is a separate problem so it should be acknowledged as such.

If it is the scenario NorthWind is concerned about, then it wouldn't prompt me to say "I don't care" since I "do" care in a sense in which "I" define the word (and I am the one who is speaking).

Thats why it seems like the concern of the woman in example 3 -- at least the one that she verbalized -- is separate than both of your concerns. What she pictures is that I don't care and I actually know I don't care -- which means that I don't care about any aspect of it, not just some -- yet still somehow manage to get angry about the situation I am totally apathetic about (or if I don't get angry what would make me declare I don't care totally out of the blue). So that just hard to imagine how that can happen.

No, my concern is that you appear to be upset because you do not understand women.

Women are not meant to be understood.

They are meant to be loved.

QFT you seem to have a sort of black-and- white thought process and also come off as arrogant, the former is alright(to an extent) the latter turns women away really quick.

This thread title alone comes off as arrogant and the way you keep saying that these women should've been able to pick up on this thing or that thing or not concentrate on this or that and the fact that you keep using logic to try and invalidate these women's emotional responses is concerning.

Some of the problems you described makes me think that you expect people to know these things about you and the way you see the world and if they don't you start feeling some sort of superiority and acting conceited towards them.

I recommend taking some time to do some serious self-reflecting cause the women don't seem blind or super-vigilant.

Good point, women ....... tend to get creeped out by men who think in binary.

It's hard work even for NT males.

@QFT you need to keep making an effort to work on reading women and responding appropriately. It takes practice.

Last edited by Feyokien on 07 Oct 2020, 10:55 am, edited 1 time in total.: sexist content

As far as binary vs non-binary thinking I am not sure what aspect of it you are referring to.

One thing that would come to mind is that I keep assuming "either I am interested or I am not" while from woman's perspective my level of interest might be somewhere in a gray area. If that's what you mean, it doesn't really address my objection. Because its not that "if your level of interest is super high you won't misphrase it, but if it is in the gray area you will". So if thats what the women are thinking, that would still be a misunderstanding.

Another thing that comes to mind -- which would make more sense -- is that the gray area is not about my level of interest but rather about her reasons. Namely, its not that her reason is one or the other (as I seemed to have been saying in my last two replies) but rather its a combination of everything. In this case I agree with you, most likely it is. But then let me phase it differently: why is my supposed lack of interest even a factor if I stated clearly I misphrased it.

I understand that with a lot of other things there are grey areas. But I guess when it comes to misphrasings that's an exception. Let me give you an example. Lets say I said "I am angry" and you heard "I am hungry", and then I correct you and say "no I didn't mean hungry I meant angry". Now, what if you are going to say "don't think in binary: hungry is not a binary feeling -- when you say you are not hungry, maybe you are still hungry a little bit". Thats true, but how is it relevant? You wouldn't have brought this up if you didn't mishear the word. So the very fact that mishearing the word made you bring it up is the whole entire reason why it sounds so silly. Now, I agree, hunger is not a binary feeling: thats why I chose this example, since most of the time I "am" in fact somewhere in between being hungry and not. But -- despite this fact -- I would still find it silly. Why? Because the fact that hunger has gray areas has nothing to do with the fact that the word angry sounds similar to the word hungry. So if the issue of grey areas of hunger gets brought up in connection to a word being misheard, that feels strange right there.

Now, if it "was" in fact about hunger, I wouldn't be bothered by it so much since I don't have that much to lose for being or not being hungry. But in case of finding love I do have a lot to lose. So if a woman rejects me all because of some silly misphrasing, then that is quite frustrating (particularly if it takes me like a year to find another woman).

In fact let me bring up a different example. Thats the one I actually heard back in ESL class back in 1994. I don't think it is possible in real life, but according to that story they gave in the ESL class someone said they wanted to fly to Oakland but they mispronounced it and were put on the plane to Auckland. According to that story, they were then given free hotel in Auckland and they had to rebook them to Oakland. But let me change that story a little bit. Lets say that -- instead of rebooking them -- they were told that "its a gray area where you want to go, so maybe some part of you wants to go to Auckland". I bet this would get them very upset, wouldn't you think? And its not because there are no gray areas here. I mean there "were" times when I was torn between different destinations. I can imagine myself having two conferences in mind (one in Oakland and the other in Auckland) and be torn between which one I want to go to. But the whole point is that this possibility has absolutely nothing to do with the word being misheard. So if one suspects a gray area on the basis of misheard word, thats really frustrating.

Now what I face is even more frustrating than what they face. I would rather be stranded in a different continent for a couple of weeks (nice adventure) than to lose the possibility of romance that might last for many years if not a lifetime.

Last edited by QFT on 23 Sep 2020, 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You don't get it QFT. You attribute peripheral things to why you are being rejected. NT women are extremely adept at reading a man's demeanour from the way they carry themselves, what they say and how they sound. It sends a signal to their brain that this man is to be trusted or not.

I understand this is frustrating but its the same challenge even for NT men. I think I read somewhere that NT women make up their minds in the first 30 seconds of speaking to a man whether they are sexually interested in them.

I think the best analogy is choreographed singing/dancing - in addition to body language its also about eye contact, voice, pitch etc how they synchronise determines whether the girl finds you interesting or worthy of talking to and pursuing some type of relationship. The content of conversation is often less important in terms of first impressions.

Of course all these rules of thumb become proportionally less important depending on how good looking you are and how rich or important you are. Otherwise you are in the same boat as the rest of the male species.

Lets put it this way. In case of 99% of women, what you are saying is correct: they just reject me from the get-go. But, in case of the four examples I presented in this thread, it was different. And it was different for two reasons:

a) They actually named those items that you called "peripheral things". If they didn't name them, I would have never thought of them, at least not in that particular way they brought it up.

b) In case of women in Examples 3 and 4 I had positive conversations with them for several days before those misunderstandings happen -- so that kinda rules out the "bad first impression scenario" you seem to be talking about. As far as the woman in Example 3, she was talking to me probably 5 hours a day, and there was one time when she went as far as telling me how she masturbates (but no, other conversations I had with her weren't sexual) and we also were discussing the possibility of a visit few months down the road. As far as women in Example 4, it didn't quite get that far, but they were still messaging me pages and pages of email (which is why they found it frustrating when I missed some of those details); so if they didn't like me from the get-go,they wouldn't have done it. In case of Example 2 it was few hours rather than few days, but still, few hours is more than 30 seconds. She offered me to email her within first 5 minutes, and then she was sending me lots of text with emoji and also when I first appeared upset that she didn't respond as often she tried to work through it by offering to talk on the phone and only got frustrated later when it didn't work.

But like I said, the women to whom points "a" and "b" pertain are 1%. As far as the other 99%, I would agree with your assessment: they reject me on the basis of bad first impression. But then when I look at that 1%, I am thinking "could it be that the other 99% are thinking the same thing this 1% is thinking, and are just not telling me". Obviously it can't be "exactly" the same, since with this 1% I talked to them for two weeks and with the rest of 99% I haven't exchanged a single word. But could it be the same "concept". For example, maybe the other 99% are picking apart the wrinkles on my clothes the same way as this 1% is picking apart some tiny misphrasings that I use? If so, then in both cases it would be rather paradoxical: they have the time to carefully look at me to find my flaws, yet they don't have time to talk to me in order to test their assumptions.

I am not saying that the other alternative is any better by the way. Both seems unfair, just in a different way. So if it was the way you describe it rather than the way I describe it, it would also be unfair. If they just decide that I am not to be trusted because of "gut feelings" that is like character assassination. And I don't see how can this be justified either. If anything, producing a good first impression is about being or not being clumsy. So are they assuming that clumsy people are not to be trusted? If so, how can this assumption possibly be justified? Whether or not a person is to be trusted has to do with their free-will choice: do they want to be a good person or do they want to be an a**hole. Whether that person is socially awkward or not has to do with how they are born and how their brain is wired. Two completely separate things. If anything, a bank robber is probably *not* that awkward: or else they won't have all that skill to do that bank robbery.

So I guess to sum it up, 99% of women say "the big picture is you are a loser so we don't care about anything you do". But the other 1% say "the big picture is you are a great person" but then two weeks later they say "oh this one little detail made me think I was wrong in that big picture, goodbye". Both of these situations are frustrating, but in totally different ways. And sometimes I wonder whether they are two sides of the same coin or two separate phenomenon. Even though I would be frustrated in both cases, since these are different brands of frustration, thats why I want to know which one it is.

But why does it have to be a choice between them being loved and them being understood? Why can't it be both? In fact, understanding and love should be two things that work together, bringing the two people close to each other. A love without understanding is a really shallow type of love, don't you think?

And yes sometimes people do tell me that it feels like I am all about logic and have no feelings. But that puzzles me too. If I truly didn't have feelings pertaining to women, then I would just occupy my "logical" brain with math and physics 24/7. The whole entire reason I take the *topic* of my thought (logical or otherwise) is women is that I do have feelings. Now, I am *using* logic in order to *process* feelings. So, for me, logic and feelings go hand in hand. And I don't understand why other people assume otherwise.

Well, if I were to feel superior, I won't be so frustrated. One of the main reasons I want a girlfriend is that I feel *inferior* to everyone else who is in a relationship so I want self validation. That feeling of inferiority causes me to sound *intense*. Maybe my *intensity* is being confused with a sense of superiority but, if so, that would be yet another misunderstanding. Cause like I said, if I truly felt superior, I won't have that need for self validation to begin with.

NTs, especially NT women do NOT think logically so trying to analyze their behavior with logic will throw you for a loop & get you all confused which will lead to a bad headache(I've been there). Guys in general tend to have a hard time understanding women. There even was a famous book titled something like "Men Are From Mars, Women are from Venus" that I never read. Some people think of Aspergers as being an extreme male brain. So it seems logical that us Aspie guys will have MAJOR problems understanding NT women. That said, it is not impossible for us Aspie guys to have realtionships with NT women. We need to find the rite NT woman thou. Someone who's willing to try to learn to communicate with us instead of us being expected to learn NT woman launguage as well as we know our Aspie one. It will take compromising from us & them to make a relationship work. The kinds of women who are willing to try & compromise with us may be someone super sweet or someone who really wants to be with us for whatever reason. Maybe a woman who's desperate cuz she's very lonely(like if she has disabilities or other guys consider her very ugly or something) or because the Aspie is sucsesfull(like if he has a great career in the STEM fields or if the woman needs a place to stay or is a mail-order bride or something).