Love-shyness

Post Reply New Topic

The number of boys with AS dropping out of junior high is pretty high in Norway...

I think you are likely right for many aspies (altho i can't say in Toad's case that is it because his maturity levels ring loud and clear from the screen. I thought he was way older than he is based on how he thinks and writes his thoughts out). I know my b/f had this issue that is why he only had some successes in dating mid 30s. He had years to 'mature' and kind of catch up to the women in his age group. He is still behind me in maturity even tho we are the same age, but a lot of men in their 40s are more immature than women in their 40s so it doesn't bother me. I find the childlike qualities he has very endearing and cute.

Altho the OCD that is often present in Aspies (or maybe it isn't officially OCD but rather a trait of AS that mimics OCD, that is likely the case) can really razzle my nerves on occasion but at laest when i smile and say 'hey there you're spazzing out" he will stop, take a breath, and slow it down.

If he didn't slow it down i'd likely lose my mind. I can be pretty OCD too but he makes me look like a snail...seriously. And no one i have ever met has been able to do that LOL

HA HA i had not read this when I was composing my last post. I see I was pretty spot on. LOL
You ARE ahead of your curve Toad. That is why like i told you before i think your successes in love will come a bit later...i know, i know that doesn't make you feel any better right this second.

I still say you should look at women older than you...not too much older, maybe 29 or 30 as that is when they are likely more settled and more a match for your intelligence and maturity. You remind me of my 27 year old guy friend. I have to remind myself a lot that we are 13 years apart in age! If i was single i could see myself dating him despite the age difference and that rarely happens as most men in their 20s are not a good match for me in many areas. And i am not exactly a fluff bunny so that says a lot for his maturity and intelligence.

Hmm, maybe I'm just immature and uncomfortable with it. Add a ridiculous degree of social anxiety and ineptitude and it's going to be difficult. I've had guys take an interest and persevere to no end, but I've never liked them back enough to reciprocate.

Lol, Whoa! Slow down, horsie! You got a lot of years ahead of you yet, and plenty of time to have kids. Why not get some enjoyment out of life first? There's a lot life has to offer besides cranking out kids right away. Kids are a whole other bunch of issues themselves, and more worries. Do you feel mentally prepared to raise kids? Maybe you should get some things straight now and some issues worked out before you bring more lives into the world, and a whole other level of responsibility.

I had similar feelings at some point -- no one who tried seemed good enough, and I was not confident enough in myself (I didn't love myself enough and felt like I wasn't good enough) to let a lot of people in.

Do you think you might be too picky? It is a human tendency to aim high when we are dating, often higher than our "level," not that it isn't something that can happen. I kept focusing on some ideal, and missed out on a lot of great people as a result. I'm not saying you should take something that is unacceptable, but some of our standards are excuses to not get out of our comfort zone.

I've had all the enjoyment that I need for some time now, at least aside from the enjoyment of a significant other (which is kind of a prerequisite for a family anyway...) In any case, I don't derive enjoyment from many of those outgoing activities that most other people enjoy (although I do enjoy it if a potential significant other enjoys it more due to my presence)... the things I enjoy in life I can do quite easily from the comfort of my own home...


The mental dimension is actually where I feel the most prepared... I've been taking care of my LFA brother for the last 7 years, and that in and of itself has had issues most parents never face... Conversely, I'm fully aware that I am in no economic condition to raise children at this point in my life, hence the economical considerations in my last post... I know that such an endeavor would most definitively be stressful, but then I would at least feel that I've done something productive for the world...


Well, like I said, I have to be economically stable before I can truly settle down, and that means finishing college and getting a job... but yeah, it doesn't make me feel any less lonely...

You don't have to be 'truly' ready to settle down just to date women in an older age bracket Toad.

If I could find a single woman that had enough patience to let me finish my college degree and get a job first, that would be great... if such a woman existed...

The only other thing I could think of is finding a woman like me that was finishing her own degree to become economically independent (or just get better jobs), and wanted to settle down sooner... not that many of those in this day and age either... maybe if I lived in the 50s it would be easier...

I don't see why it's so important that a disorder has to be "gender neutral". There are issues that men face that are different from the issues women face. The idea that men are generally expected to initiate relationships being one example. I never even used to know this and always figured it was no big deal that I was too terrified to ever do such. I figured that eventually some extroverted woman would approach me. But that is not how reality works. A woman, even a shy woman, can expect to be approached at some point, even if it takes a while. A guy could go his whole life and never get approached romantically, and be too terrified to do it on his own. There are plenty of issues that women face that men don't, every body admits that. I don't see why it's a big deal that Gilmartin is suggesting there is a set of problems that men face that women, for the most part, do not. Why is he under obligation to be "gender neutral"? Why doesn't anybody hold feminists up to this task when they talk about female specific issues?

and this stuff about disregarding the whole book because he included one chapter with some "pseudo science" is stupid. Yea, he went out on a limb there and it back fired, but it doesn't change the fact that he made good points elsewhere in the book. Honestly, I've never understood the bile sometimes directed at Gilmartin for seemingly innocuous mistakes. I don't think anybody is suggesting love-shyness is a "hard scientific disorder", but something that perhaps needs further study, which for a bunch of reasons has yet to happen. I will look more into this "avoidant personality disorder". I could be that LSness is some kind of subset of that, primarily effecting males. But without further study (which for political reasons is unlikely), we can't really know for sure.

I suppose it's something of a pet peeve of mine, where if something isn't 100% scientifically sound, it's completely invalidated. As if the scientific method was the only way to explain the unexplainable ways of the universe.

This is a myth that girls are way more mature than guys ... and this myth is usually supported by girls like you because you like it , the maturity difference is only true for teens perhaps but not for adults.

Nt girls are usually 2-3 years ahead of nt boys in maturity, but 7-8 years ahead of Aspie boys.

Scientific source please?

I think it might be the kind of problem that you need to be a bit "out of your element" to even think to write a book about. I mean, if the things he is describing are so ubiquitous for some men, why wasn't this phenomenon picked up on earlier by a more mainstream researcher? Love-shyness is an issue that is easy to overlook, for many reasons Gilmartin talked about. Shy guys who have trouble getting girlfriends usually stay quiet about the fact, lest they be mocked as "whiny emo b*****s"; but the torment they endure in silence is very real. He mentioned that "LS" men should speak out for their rights, but he didn't seem to understand how ludicrous a bunch of passive guys protesting this issue would come off as. Especially when you consider how introspective and guarded the men he interviewed tended to be.

Was Gilmartin a bit nuts himself? Probably, but because of this he was able to perceive a deeper truth that other "normal" people missed. It also made him a questionable researcher and got him written off as a quack. Win some, lose some, I guess.

Also, I'm wondering where he was derogatory in the book. I don't remember that.

Unfortunately for you, you will be lucky to find a girl your age with this kind of mindset.

all ailments of the body commonly accepted by the scientific community are fully capable of affecting both genders. When it comes to body parts, if you have it, it can get sick... The only exceptions are for the actual sex organs... I.e. a woman can't get testicular cancer and a man can't get cervical cancer... Other than that, even if something predominantly affects only one gender, there are still diagnosed cases found in the other gender. There are documented cases of men getting breast cancer or osteoporosis, and we here at WP are fully aware of women with AS...


I wouldn't say completely invalidated... certainly he made some good points, but it cannot be accepted on scientific grounds. By refusing to even acknowledge the female gender as even being affected by it (even in the secondary effects such as being unable to get a job, something that would affect women just as much as men), and by completely disregarding that such a thought process may just be a healthy variation on the brain's structure (instead he keeps proclaiming "shyness is never healthy"), it feels like he is trying to design the diagnosis rather than just observing the

However, science is not the only thing in this world... I would never make any claim that my Christian faith is in any way scientific, but I believe nonetheless... and I would never impose that you shouldn't believe in this theory if you do believe it... but just as athiests have the right to think me blind to reality for believing in Jesus, I have the right to think so for you and this theory...

One thing I do want to be scientific is the diagnosis and treatment process... I don't want to be diagnosed with something that hasn't been scientifically researched...


Not outright... but he was a bit condescending towards his "patients" throughout... expecting there to be one "normal" way and any deviation from that is not healthy...