Question for the Aspie males that want girlfriends.

Post Reply New Topic

Sorry for replying to this one a bit late as well.

(This isn't the best quote to enter into this sub-topic, it's brought up in other stuff you've said, but....)
Then here is one crux of 'our problem.' It's an internet forum of semi-random strangers, so by it's nature it will tend to lack an 'expert.' This means one of two things: No critical discussion(let alone advice) may occur, or it's 'buyer-beware' in the marketplace of ideas.
Is there good and bad advice around? Yes, both.
And no, none, because we cannot give a single premise a fully logical or clinical dissection and conclusion. We are limited by our knowledge and experience.

If you choose to stick with the latter conclusion, then that not only serves to shut down the sharing of ideas, but it also gives little credit for the potential that much of what gets said is worth thinking about, worth trying, might even be 'correct.' A bad word to use in this context, I know, but you see what I'm getting at I hope. Certainly it avoids the spread of bad/wrong ideas and inaccurate conclusions, but is that really worth it? Given the common experiences that can be relied upon to occur in western society, there is enough idea-comparing and filtering that would occur, that non-expert derived ideas will usually only travel so far before it gets filtered out somehow, if it doesn't jive pretty well with life. Not always, sure(hello, Fox News/MSNBC). But this loose system works well enough that I do not believe a forum of peers is so without-merit as you seem to imply.

And anyways, there's such a volume of posts and problems that it's simply impractical to attempt clinical-style rigor. Does that mean the resultant ideas suffer? Yes. Enough to render the entire thing moot? I don't think so.
In short, I don't think you're being realistic in your broad critique of non-expert derived ideas. A forum of random peoples' conclusions on complex topics may be imperfect, but considering the post volume, and kind of people who will(or, more to-the-point, will not) be present, it's a constructive entity. I think this can be quantified with examples of people who feel they have gained a benefit, even compared with those who may have suffered from it.

Can, of course. But does it here? Or perhaps faith was simply the wrong word, since I'm not basing my opinion on the metaphysical. I've seen people show that they are capable of pretty amazing resilience in adversity when they feel resolved.
That said, I've only been watching this forum since the beginning of the year. For understanding his personality, you probably have more basis than I.

In the rest of that paragraph, I'm simply not sure what you're trying to get at.
However regarding starting with 'least dangerous assumption,' I think that's overly cautious. We are not any poster's therapist or neurologist, and our ideas will not be thought of or treated as coming from such. We will be filtered. Thus if we'd suggested something that was drastic, generally the only thing accomplished in the end would be to provoke the poster to consider the ideas' direction, end point, details. When you under-emphasize a direction, not much get's put on their plate for mental digestion. I guess you could argue that giving bum advice with vast consequences risks the poster seeing vast bad consequence if they undertook said advice. However, that's very unlikely to happen. We will be filtered, not just by the poster's sole mind, but by other responders who'd shoot down subtly or flagrantly bad ideas. By assessing the risk/reward so cautiously, we would diminish the reliable, recurring, potential benefit of a broad spread of ideas presented.

That said, I feel there is also a balance to be struck between vast assumption or complete lack of. The more people reply, the better the balance, usually.

This isn't realistic; We're on the internet. If you can find a way to make cognitive behavioral therapy realistically applicable on this medium, please show us.
And comparing the use of a server job on what appears to be a common introvert with some manageable AS to the broad concept of immersion on a PTSD victim is not a very good comparison, IMO. Both the risks and the stakes for one are far higher than the other.

Hehe, yeah, I could see early on your axe to grind regarding false-expertise. That's a good crusade if I ever saw one.
But what about the balance? There are few experts, and there are many situations to be considered. A shutdown of consideration from the rest of the unwashed masses represents a pretty huge hit to the spread of ideas, and thought on the subject. I agree, spread of inaccurate info sucks, but maybe the alternative sucks more?
That said, I don't suggest you let it all go. Again, balance. I think that in reality, we need more of you, but we also still need arm-chair generals too.

Lack of cohesion is a benefit that is lost, yes. We are many and various, as are our ideas. But without some organization on the part of a poster(as opposed to a responder), and prompting for more structure and detail in a direction defined by a poster alone(no one else can decide), I don't see how it would be possible to change gears from the idea-free-for-all. Though, that would be pretty cool, if there was a forum with such a culture that a shift could occur from idea-market to focused-strategy, somewhat on it's own.

As for the cognitive stuff, sounds to me like you've got a better idea on that angle than us. Lay it out, dog.

Indeed! I appreciate it.

Well, then I guess I could have better clarified. I'm not talking about a bunch of PUAs out sarging or whatever. I meant more like a normal group of friends, or a group of people who work together, or a random group of strangers that have to come together IRL for one purpose or another. Even within the pick-up world, they stick with this analogy in non-pickup situations. Again, I agree that the wolf-pack analogy should be replaced. But a limited sort of leader does tend to naturally come up. Usually it's a guy, and usually it's the one with the most forceful personality, or some pre-determined social construct, like the more famous one. But a limited kind of leader does occur that people seem to naturally acknowledge in some subtle(or overt) sense.

The reason the wolf-pack analogy persists is primarily because of the existence of this leadership position, and the details that come along with it. In the pick-up world, it's generally acknowledged that among men and women, women tend to identify and elevate the relative social value of that perceived leader(and thus his attractiveness). The guys around him are not necessarily his 'wingmen' - Indeed, they might fight(in one way or another) to take the perceived leadership/dominance position if only for the purpose of getting womens' positive attention. And if they were wingmen, the term also does not serve well to describe the hierarchy that occurs. Anyhoo, my point is that we can throw out the pack analogy, but you can't throw out the hierarchy representation that was it's purpose.

As for the ducks, that doesn't seem particularly better than wolves, hehe. Quite the conversation piece though.
There's gotta be a better popular analogy to be had.... =op


It's possible others are taking the analogy too literally.... However I get the sense that you are taking them too literally. I don't think you're granting enough benefit-of-the-doubt on a strangers' ability to sort it out. I vaguely recall the post where the guy defended the idea of a family as a pack. My impression was that he was just ill-spoken, and didn't adequately communicate what he thought the 'important' parallels were, probably that of a hierarchy. You did appear to throw out the entire thing as having no similarities.
But... As you've noted at some point, I could simply be projecting. I am a bit of an optimist, so that would represent a bias. *shrug*
Either way it's neither here nor there - I think at this point we both could vouch for each other's perceptive ability on a pretty basic level, despite whatever disagreements.

See, here's where the issue seems to be. You appear to be dismissing the nice-guy paradigm based on the potentially broad and benign use of the word nice and guy. But I'm certain that there's a very, very specific context being used here. Within that context lies an entirely different pop-culture identity and definition for the term, and it's very real. But right now I don't feel very up to defining it in a clear, fully defined manner, so that kinda undermines me, unfortunately. My point is that in this context, we're not talking about normal, innocent use of the words. With that in mind(and hoping you are aware of the rough boundaries of the context and definition), do you still feel the 'nice guy' paradigm is fallacious? And why?

I think that's accurate... But I also wonder if you're giving some appropriate wiggle room? I REALLY hate taking discussion down to catchy turns of phrase, rather than real info, but in this case I think it's important: Sometimes, perception is reality. So long as there aren't practically significant elements contradicting a perception, and that perception is held by others, then it becomes synonymous with reality. Within the umbrella of perceiving life, and positive and negative emotions, and relationships, sometimes those tainted perceptions are very relevant to the 'working reality.' We utilize those flawed perceptions every day, selectively dismissing consideration for those times where we act contrary to our self-image. And yet, if nearly all else seems to jive with that image, and others hold that image, then how is it not practically reality?

Hm. This all probably constitutes a derail.... Sorry all.

Based on your previous avatars, I'd say there are very significant 'out of the box' differences between you and Tim Tex.

well of course if you look into details. All I meant was aspergers-wise.

Haha! The sick []!
Sorry for disrupting the discussion, carry on...

I wonder if Toad or TimTex, if they're as religious as they supposedly are, have ever thought of just giving up and joining the priesthood? That idea has certainly crossed my mind on more than one occasion.

I wonder if Toad or TimTex, if they're as religious as they supposedly are, have ever thought of just giving up and joining the priesthood? That idea has certainly crossed my mind on more than one occasion.

The last thing the religious community needs is a guy with a huge sex drive and another guy that wants to hug people to death.

Hi, this is my first ever post, having read all the previous comments in this thread I felt compelled to post as it seems that my perspective might be helpful. I apologise now because I think my post will be very long as there is a lot to discuss! I am an NT female in my mid twenties and I have recently found out that the guy I like is an Aspie and I’ve been reading various threads to help me understand him better.

More on that later... First of all I would like to point out that some of the opinions about what an NT girl (or any girl for that matter) would like in a man are not true. I love computer games (although I’m not very good at them!), watch geeky shows like The Big Bang Theory and Lost and listen to rock and metal music. I tend to be attracted to guys with these interests too as it gives us things to talk about and to enjoy together. In fact, my closest friends (girls and guys) have these same interests. My main point here is that there are plenty of girls who are like this – we are not all interested in guys who go to the gym and like sports etc.

I was shocked to read one post earlier that said that there is not someone out there for everyone. Yes there definitely is!! In fact, I think that there are hundreds of guys out there who would be a great match for me in a relationship, and I’m sure that this is true for everyone. It’s just a case of meeting one of these people which can be difficult sometimes.

I agree that if you are depressed you really need help to get past this. I suffer from clinical depression, I am fine most of the time but occasionally when life gets stressful and I can’t cope I get depressed and isolate myself (i won't go into detail about this here but things did get pretty bad for me). I had been offered therapy but I didn’t feel that this would help me, I understand that it does help some people though. Instead I was prescribed fluoxetine (Prozac) and after a few weeks I felt so much better. I am now mostly off the medication and only need to take it during periods of stress that I can’t cope with.

I also agree that in order to meet someone who would be a good match in a relationship you may have to change your circumstances. For example, one person suggested changing your job – this is great advice! Getting a job or choosing a college/university course that you are interested in is a great way to meet other people with the same interests as you. For example, if you love playing video games, see if you can get a job at a gaming store. I worked in a record store because I love films and music and it’s how I met some of my best friends and, through them, is how I met the guy I like

My main disagreement with therange’s opening comment is that he implies that Aspie males have to make an effort to be more ‘normal’ if they want an NT girlfriend. I disagree with this because in any relationship both people have to make an effort. It seems to me that the biggest problem with relationships between an Aspie and an NT is that they often misunderstand each other because it is so hard to understand what each other are thinking. To overcome this problem the Aspie needs to make an effort to understand what the NT is feeling and what they want BUT ALSO the NT has to make an effort to understand what the Aspie is feeling and what they want. Communication is very important.

I mentioned before that I recently found out that the guy I like has AS. I’d liked him for months before I realised this and he told me he liked me too. We had lots of arguments before I found out though because he said he liked me but then he spent a lot of time by himself and didn’t call or text me and would often cancel plans we made at the last minute – to me it seemed like he wasn’t interested in me but now, after speaking to him, I understand that I was wrong, I misunderstood. He struggles to believe that i like him and can’t understand why I do but I think he just accepts that i do now. We are not going out yet because he needs time to decide if he wants a relationship or if he is ready for one. I think we will have to talk about this a lot before we make a decision. I know that I will have to change my expectations of a relationship to be with him but I am happy to do this because I really like him and want to be with him. I also know that he is trying hard to understand me better and I am trying to understand him too which is why I am reading the forums on Wrong Planet. I do think that it is important that I know his diagnosis because otherwise I would not understand that the way we both think is so different and we would just keep arguing and upsetting each other when we don’t mean to.

One book i have read that is particularly helpful is ‘Aspergers Syndrome: A LoveStory’. It is a non-fiction book written by Sarah Hendrickx (an NT) and Keith Newton (an Aspie) and they explain their relationship including how they first met, discovering that Keith has Aspergers, what they each do to make the relationship work and how happy they are together now. It is really useful because Sarah writes about something from her perspective and what she thought was going on, and then Keith writes about the same thing but from his perspective. They often thought different things and misunderstood each other until they talked about it and reading this book helped me to understand how an Aspie might see things, and I think it would help an Aspie to understand how an NT sees things.

Finally I found reading this thread quite difficult at times because a couple of people did seem to be treated unfairly. One of them being Toad. I think that his reasons for wanting a relationship are very good reasons and he did not seem desperate or needy to me as a couple of people had said. Also Tim, I think he has been treated unfairly too. I am sorry this post is soooo long. Please respond to any of the points I have made and ask me about anything you like, I will do my best to reply promptly

Reading that made me let out a very loud and strange sound. Hilarious.

Very well stated (Your whole post, not just the stuff quoted above).

Sometimes we just have to forget the labels we put on ourselves and realize that we are just people who need to work at understanding one another just like anyone else. We must avoid the temptation to claim we are broken and that absolves us from having to make an effort to be more understanding and to be better people.

I think therange makes some good, if somewhat black and white, points in his original post. Ultimately, it is better to stop placing the blame for one's difficulty with relationships upon another person and instead find what you can do to improve yourself. You are the only one you can change. If you try to change someone else, you will not succeed. Better to try to understand that person and try to understand yourself.

Be a better person. Assume that others are as complex and nuanced as yourself. Assume that if you are willing to make an effort, so will they. That's about all you can do in life.

Lars

Don't be shocked. I don't know who you are referring to but this is an actuate observation. There isn't a single person for everybody. If that were true the chances of meet that one person out of the 7 billion humans would be very unlikely. That doesn't mean that there isn't lot of potential partners, on the contrary.

i agree with you there, what i read in the thread earlier implied that there might not be someone out there for everyone - ie, that some people won't find a partner to match them because they don't exist. i might have read it wrong though, i'll have to search through and find the post again!! what i meant is that there are plenty of suitable people out there for everyone. For example, when i broke up with my last boyfriend i was devastated but in time i got over it and i stayed optimistic because i know that there are other guys out there who i would meet and could have a realtionship with... and i've recently met one, yay!

Again this is accurate. You can't just find partners, people make partnerships work, whether they realise it or not. The idea of guaranteed partnership for everyone is a myth.

And one that can unfortunately make people unwilling to play nice in their relationships, at that.

Truth, and truth.

Backing up a bit: AlkalineGirl, you are correct that fitting the supposed Gym/Sports/Non-nerd stereotype is not important. At all. Although it may have been coarsely spoken to seem as such, there are no 100% necessities for finding someone who likes you. Everyone's tastes are different.

However, there are still trends that are very real. And this does not change the fact that most Aspie guys seem to have difficulty making connections with people, especially women, earlier in life, before our 30s. Most NTs who are emotionally healthy, by comparison, have had a few relationships by that time, or are already married, or are going to be married. Meanwhile, we with Asperger's struggle to get a first date(let alone a second date). Thus, being content that "there's someone out there for me" is not a recipe for our own happiness. It's putting our heads in the sand. If anything, it nearly ensures our foul mood for a long time, as fortune does not tend to want to simply drop these comparatively rare and coveted relationships into our lap, so long as we have not made improvements to our emotional health and social capacity.

I'm very glad that you seem to connect with your guy; It's great! And I hope you post a bit about it in another thread, or tell us more about what you think on the subject(You seem pretty smart, so drop some knowledge on us). However, your circumstance runs counter to the odds, for many of us. It's a losing bet, and unless your guy is comparatively socially gifted, then he simply got lucky that you two met.

We are not broken, as Jagatai seems to think we're implying, not at all... As a matter of fact, I've recently been taking a lot of pride in some of our differences(Social deficit excepted). But we ARE different, and most people do not anticipate or understand the way we're different, which puts us at a disadvantage. If we want equal footing in the social realm, it requires proactive, persistent, difficult actions.

Increasing our physical health, getting more socially involved, taking better care of ourselves, and getting counseling have tended to be the most reliable methods of giving us that social footing. If you choose to interpret that as a 'Jock' stereotype, you'd be incorrect IMO. But that aside, those elements are the things that help us the most, even if there are women out there like you who aren't into those things.

And anyways... Imagine if your guy were more physically healthy, would that not be more attractive?
If your guy were more socially comfortable, would that not be more attractive?
If your guy was in a better mood more often, would that not be more attractive?
Don't misunderstand, I'm not suggesting he change, or that he isn't an awesome person, and fine as he is. But there are always ways to help one's self more. Some of us NEED that extra boost in order to 'break even' socially. Proof of that is written all over WP.

Rambling aside, I would urge you to let go of the stereotype that you think is being pushed here. It's inaccurate.

As for being hard on TheSteelToad and Tim_Tex, yes, you are right. We were not very nice to them. However, they had been consistently defending a perspective that, if adopted by others, would probably prolong the misery, resentment, and self-loathing of loneliness. Those perspectives had to be shot the heck down for the good of others seeking to find a path to a happier life. Often times the process requires an emphatic reality check, and sometimes it's just not very pleasant or civil. Often times it's a deep-seated viewpoint, which no gentle nudge can shake.
Could it have been more civil than it was? Probably yes... It's hard to tell where the line is, when you're 'in the moment.' So with that said, I offer my apologies to Tim_Tex or Toad or anyone I was needlessly mean to.

Well, for what it's worth, you did finally convince me to at least try therapy out... However, you do have to understand the viewpoint: If all one knows is rejection, how is any hypothetical "next time" going to be any different? I'm not saying that this viewpoint is 100% valid in 100% of situations, but from the viewpoint of the constantly rejected, it sure as hell seems a lot more true than it would otherwise.

And no, I didn't think you were being too harsh, just the aforementioned that i went on a shitfest towards...