My thoughts on modern dating.

Post Reply New Topic

I was socially "naive" growing up, and I still prefer the more traditional monogamous relationship... I need that one person that I can trust completely and unconditionally with everything... that just doesn't work with anything polyamorous... I don't care what other people do (whatever goes on between consenting adults is none of my business unless I'm somehow involved), but the article insults monogamy as monotony... and I don't take kindly to being personally insulted...

I read the article. The woman in the article isn't socially isolated. She goes to parties. Specifically sex parties and specifically in San Francisco. The people described in the article are into non-conventional relationships, yes. But you missed the part where they aren't socially isolated. They are sociallizing quite a bit. According to this article (and what I assumed anyway), if you want to meet a woman who has casual sex with lots of men, you will have to be in the middle of a social circle. As I said, she isn't hanging on the margins shyly waiting for somebody to talk to her. That this particular "party girl" is found at a sex party in San Francisco populated entirely by software engineeers rather than a post-football game party doesn't change anything except the nature of the conversations the people are having when they aren't having sex.

Of course sex actually has a purpose. Why do you think that "biological phenomena can't have a purpose in any real sense, just a reason why they evolved?" The reason why the phenomena evolved tells you what its purpose is, although people often come up with purposes beyond the original evolutionary ones.

So, what would a girl who doesn't fit in socially do if she wants to experiment sexually with various guys? Just fake fitting in, even if she hates everything else those people do except sex, or just walk up to single guys or small groups and start looking?

And also, what makes you think that those people in the article, when they aren't going to those sex parties, aren't possibly very socially isolated? Writing computer code requires extended periods of almost superhuman focus, that don't lend themselves well to chatting with anyone, even the guy or girl at the next computer over. And a lot of them are probably aspies too.

What makes me think they aren't socially isolated is that...they're going to sex parties. Somebody who concentrates very hard on their work is not necessarily socially isolated. Social isolateion involves far more than work. It means social isolation, not just hunkering down by yourself when you're working. People who go to sex parties aren't socially isolated. They have a social circle. That social circle is the other people at the sex parties.

They may or may not be Aspies. But the mere fact that they write computer software for a living does not mean they are Aspies. That is not mandatory for coding.

She finds the people she does fit in socially with, as the people in the article did. I can't really imagine a woman who dislikes being around people in general yet also wants to have sex with lots of men. Given that there are 6 billion people out there she must surely exist, perhaps hundreds of women are like that. But Theory of Mind utterly fails me trying to imagine a woman who never wants to be around people except to have sex with men she doesn't want to otherwise be around. So I have no idea what this hypothetical woman would do.

I get the sense that for many people in free software, coding is a lot more than work, i.e. a way to make money. They would be doing that even if it were just a hobby. Because otherwise, why not commercially license and sell the software, and make a whole lot more money?

As an aside, this is one of the reasons why, in fact, I have sometimes found that I didn't socially fit in well with other science grad students--particularly in my old program. They saw research as a form of work, like any other job, and even if they were "nerdy" in the sense that they would make jokes and comments having to do with their field of study, I got the sense that was only because they were exposed to it so much in their daily lives. They would talk about their research in social settings, as in "oh, we made cell cultures today, but there was an issue with the incubator", but aside from the nitty-gritty of what they were working on, they would discuss things that weren't so much more intellectual than what any other 20-somethings would talk about. Whereas for me, yes I don't so much want to talk about work per se at social events, but there are so many scientific ideas I'm interested in discussing that are more visionary and don't have to do with a specific research project, or just general concepts that aren't scientific. Now, I'm not saying there aren't many other scientists who are like this, it's just that this is not the general tone among grad students.

But back to your comments, I guess if you consider a group of sexual "play buddies" a social circle, then those people can't be socially isolated.

They don't have to NEVER want to be around people to find themselves in this situation, they just have to want much less social contact than the average person relative to their desire for sexual experimentation.

And also, keep in mind that the kind of people one wants to sexually or romantically experiment with are not necessarily the same type as one wants in the circle of people he or she does the most socializing with.

And what comes to mind here is this girl's profile I found on OKCupid. When I first joined, I did a search for "autism" and "asperger", just to see how many people on there openly admit to being on the spectrum (I don't). There was one girl who said something like, "I don't really want another person to spend a lot of time in my life. I've realized I wouldn't want that. But I do really like sexual encounters a lot." At first (before joining this forum) that the majority of aspie girls would be like that. I''ve since been proven wrong, but these kind of people (aspie or not) are what I'm referring to.

Oh, really? And just who decided this, exactly?

Why not? If I were diagnosed, and still bothered with online dating sites, I'd most definitely include that information in my profile.

I suspect it would turn some women off, who either just don't want to be involved with any guy who has some kind of mental "label", or else who understand about the autism spectrum and believe it will cause more trouble than it's worth even in a casual relationship.

Her avatar is a female, her name is SINsister and her profile says female. I don't know how many more clues you require.

Anyway, if one's goal is to find a sex partner, then you'd be right. But if a goal is a relationship with someone compatible, well then the profile must be as honest as possible or you won't find what you are looking for.

I'd highly discourage anyone from doing that, being open and upfront is one thing, but anyone who you're potentially going to date doesn't need that information until things start to get serious. I've said it before and will reiterate, describe your "symptoms", to your heart's content, this is the one place were the ambiguous nature of AS works in our favor, who isn't shy, reserved, or not fully comfortable in social situations? It's far to easy to scare off a potential soul mate by listing your obscure and poorly understood neurological condition front and center on your personal ad, people will just see that and move on without ever giving you a chance. I've dated a good dozen women or so I've met on the internet, and my decision to hold off on AS disclosure at least until we're thinking about exclusivity has never yet come back to haunt me, it's never been a problem at that point as they are by then used to me, it's just a name for my uniqueness.

Any 'soul mate' of mine will also sport an "obscure and poorly understood neurological condition." I wouldn't even bother dating (or trying to finagle a date with) a "normal," ffs. What would be the point?

Well, you're cutting yourself out of 90%+ percent of the market that way, but to each their own I suppose. All of my girlfriends have been NT, nothing wrong with that at all, I only got diagnosed in late 2007 myself, till then I just thought I was an odd duck, never stopped me from dating though. As things stand, I believe that the following statement applies equally to NTs and Aspies, "If you've met one of them, you've met one of them", in other words, everyone is unique and no one can know for certain if their "perfect" mate will be an Aspie or an NT, and declaring either category off limits is kind of silly.

I am well aware that she's female. She was asking why I would not include that information in MY dating profile. Re-read the question, silly

And Dox47, I agree with you. Though maybe I'm just not as cynical because I haven't been on this earth as long as she has.