Two "kinds" of love

Post Reply New Topic

I married because I wanted to have a stable family, not to have fun with somebody or play social games.



You don't need to have similar interests or career aspirations. In fact, I'd never find anybody that shared my special interests in operating system design. To complement each others probably is better than to be too similar.



No, in order to stay together you need to form a strong mutual attachment that is not only based on sex, games and "having fun".

rdos, I respect your opinion, but I can't relate to a single thing you said. For me, a "stable family" is the opposite of fun. Maybe you're cool with it because you already got to have fun (i.e. first type of love) in your young years. I didn't have my first date until I was 18, and she was kind of boring to be around. So either my brain is playing catch-up or I'm just too damn jaded. And also, if you don't have fun in your relationships, how can you become attached? Intimate sharing makes me feel guarded and on edge, not attached, because I fear how that information will be used against me later.

I guess I'm more relaxed when having sex with strangers than in a relationship. It's why I have an easy time having sex with escorts. It just feels refreshingly honest and straightforward, a far cry from relationships sex filled with obligations.

You're probably less jaded than me, so I'll state my opinion and leave it at that. "Love" is like religion; you can't argue it.

You don't have to be identical with all your your intrests, but a little common ground would be nice. Something!

How can you form an attachment to someone you don't have fun with and have nothing in common with? Also, if it is not based only on sex, then what is it based on. Your definition of fun may be the reason people get confused in "relationships."

How is it that love is being separated into fun and serious. If it's just for "fun" that sounds like using people for FUN until your ready to settle down for marraige. That kind of "LOVE" leads to confusion and heartache for the other people who think love, is about more than just someone using them for FUN until the other person is ready to find someone else to Settle down with.


This is why everyone's opinion of love is different. This is why people should have the what is your meaning of love and relationships conversation, before getting involved with someone who is just looking for a good time aka FUN.

Oh and as far as a stable family goes, do you and your family enjoy vacations together, spending time together, and love each other? Because that is a serious relationship that includes fun, my definition of fun.

How can it be?

The trouble might be how we define "fun". For me "fun" mostly is a bad thing related to social games and partying, something I don't find fun at all. The real fun for me is to be deeply involved in special interests, or obsessing with a girl. That's what I regard as fun.

For me, at stable family is built on a strong attachment that is not dependent on constant game-playing and "fun".



If I've had any date at all, it was just before I turned 30, and it didn't go well (mostly because of the girl's mother). If we are talking about "fun" in the typical meaning of the word, I don't think I ever had it simply because I don't regard it as "fun".



All my three strongest attachments formed through obsessing about a girl, and in none of these cases where there any verbal interaction while these attachments formed. In the only relationship I've had that didn't start like this, rather was similar to an online meeting, I got a poor attachment. Thus, the relationship that started similar to online dating was the only relationship I've had where the attachment was not strong, and where I could quite easily get on with my life after we broke up.

So, I don't form attachments with "fun" or sex. For me, strong attachments form before I learn to know a girl.

For me, "fun" is discovery, in figuring out new things. Social games are not fun for me either. Though neither is building a stable family.

It seems you may have a more "grown up" way in which the desire for romance and relationships manifests. For me, "stable families" are what create the bubble in which I can explore and find excitement in learning, dreaming, and creating stuff that I have learned. For me to imagine being a part of that bubble myself is something I can't truly fathom, how others can be so stable in their emotions and attachments that others can lean on them. It's the same as a kid finding it amazing how his parents can drive a car.

You may find it odd that I have a strong sense of the role that stable families and attachment play in my life, yet can't actually understand it, and don't have a tendency to feel that way myself. I think that is part of the paradox of creative people, especially those who tend toward having various mental conditions--our increased mental intensity and chaotic mood makes us less stable and settled, yet for the very same reason we are more vulnerable to unsettled environments. It's probably a general feature of personality types--what we need the most from others are the qualities that are so foreign to us we can't imagine having them ourselves.

I don't know, maybe you also had more childhood friendships than I did. I was very much a loner, so now I'm very much like the kid who first goes to the playground and sees that there are other kids around who also want to play. Yet I'm just learning who wants to play the same way I do, and go on adventures with them. Yet what to me is an "adventure" is often something that most people my age have already been through and gotten jaded by.

Yes, fun is discovery, figuring out new things AND obsessing about girls. Stability is more or less unrelated to fun, rather is related to attachment. If two people don't have a strong attachment, they have low motivation to stick together and low motivation to compromise. OTOH, you can have fun with or without attachment.



Yes, same here. I grew up in such a family bubble.



It doesn't take a lot to get there, and it can happen at any time. Around 30 I also didn't think it would happen to me, but it still did.



I think this is because we don't understand how we work naturally, and copy too much of the ways of NTs, many which doesn't work for us. I think we all have the ability to form a long-term stable relationship, many of us just don't know how to do it or how to find somebody to do it with.



No, I was a complete loner in childhood. I didn't say anything in school until in 8th grade or something (selective mutism), and even after that it was just short replies if somebody talked to me. Actually, in high-school and college I didn't feel I had anything in common with my peers (except for a few oddballs), which at least partly explain why I didn't want any friends in college. Having (mutual) obsessions with girls in high-school and college was all I needed and wanted.

Having one strong interest in common can be a good idea. If not, you can always get involved in something you both enjoy. When I met my wife, we had a common interest in dancing, which I had got interested in just half-a-year before, and that we more or less obsessed with in the beginning (well, we still do).



Everybody has something in common, and even if you don't match social status and interests, a nonverbal getting to know each others phase tells you a lot about a person. It probably tells you more about what is important than the dating game which is just a game full of lies and half-lies.



This is all NT-things that I feel has little to do with the neurodiverse attachment process.



Yes, we do family vacations, we spend time together, and we have a strong attachment (don't want to use the word "love" as it is so ambiguous).

This!

I think it's possible to have desire for a stable family only if you were able to get the playful, childish love/bond out of your system at an appropriate age. This is why I can't understand settling down; while I had childhood friendships, I never experienced young love. You know, those hokey "running through the park together", "drinking a milkshake from two straws", "kissing in front of school locker" things. So now, I'm craving them like never before, and I'm well aware that it's virtually impossible to find that among people in their 30's like me. So I make do with seeing escorts for sex.

Going back to the cruise girl example, who I met when I was 29 (she was 23). The thing we had on that cruise was as close to young love as I'll ever have. That ship was our high school, for all practical purposes, although I incorporated flirting tactics I learned at a much later age. Mind you, she wasn't my type (gothic clothes, multiple tattoos, etc.), had a kid at home, and was engaged. She was pretty attractive, though. It'd have been interesting to know what her story was, and what prompted her to cheat with a stranger on vacation (we kissed, but nothing further). Also, college-age girls, who found me creepy when I was their age, were so warm and friendly toward me on that cruise, I was floored.

Last edited by Aspie1 on 30 Apr 2015, 9:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Never did any of those things either. The only thing I ever did with girls at that age was to flirt with them at a distance. Even if one girl participated in this for 3 years in college, we never really talked or were in a formal relationship (but neither of us fancied anybody else either).

About the playfulness, I think people her look for it in the wrong phase. If you get together with somebody compatible, you can be playful with them once you are in a relationship, or with your kids when you get them. Getting kids is a perfect excuse to become like a child again.

I suspect people her presume they will get together with NT-players that want to play social games, and have no desire to participate in anything else. They probably also presumes it will be super-serious, and that once they finally reach their goal they need to be super-serious in keeping up the game so they don't get left behind, and then they cannot afford to be playful. This, of course, is a huge error in their reasoning.

its not just nts who are like that aspie women are to. you are two hung up on this nt vs aspies thing.
the playfulness I want can never be had with kids. its romantic playfulness. people after 30 already had it and move on to the serious only stage in relationships. its then considered childish and wrong.

Not so. I know at least 3 female aspies that enjoyed playing in a childish way. One was wife, another was way older than 30, and one around 20 at the time and she did this all the time. I know no NT female that ever did this after 20 years of age. So, it is definitely an Aspie thing.

In fact, we made a point of doing this on Aspie meetings, and a few would follows us (mostly other females), while some males would ignore us and go elsewhere.



It's just you that are too serious about relationships and that think everybody expect this level of seriousness.

well i've met or seen or known more nts to be playful then aspies. and theres quite a few serious aspie women here.
my point wasn't that aspies don't do it, but rather you can't say all nts don't and all aspies do. nts and aspies are people there'll all different.

if you'd read my posts you'd realize how stupid the last thing you said is. my problem is I'm too playful and romantic for serious late end relationships. even women in their 20s say " I want a man not a child" ie someone that's serious and not childish ie playful. look at women older and one sees it only gets worse. they don't want a goofy playful husband when they have 5 kids. they want a serious one that works hard and deals with the kids.

which is why my time is almost out on finding the relationship I want.

Neurodiversity is a spectrum, not a binary category, so this applies to every neurodiverse trait. Without exception. Thus, this is just a meaningless "point".



Not true. As I said, you are playing by the NT rules, and when you do, don't expect to get your needs fulfilled.

I know several neurodiverse girls older than 20 years (one around 30) that enjoys what you want. But you won't find them as you are targeting NTs.

Besides, I'm married to one, so I should know what I'm talking about.

sly279 and rdos, pipe down. You're forgetting something. LOOK at the country names in your profiles; they're different!

So consider the possible language and/or culture barrier. Perhaps you're defining words "playful" and "serious" differently, with different connotations and hidden meanings. So no wonder you're disagreeing. Also, from what I know, Sweden has a very fun-loving culture: winter sports, saunas (maybe that's only Finland, but I'm wagering a guess), Viking art, Midsummer festivals, etc. So being "playful", regardless of how you define it, is more socially acceptable there. America, by contrast, is about work work work, almost to the exclusion of everything else. Playfulness is looked down upon for anyone over 25. Unless you're on a Caribbean cruise, one thing America has good access to from its Florida ports.

Also, due to polar nights in winter, Sweden had no choice but to come up with coping methods to keep from falling into a depression, which meant having as much fun as possible. The midnight sun in summer, even more so; people have 24 hours each day to have fun outside and really enjoy nature, before winter hits. Long European-style vacations also let people relax and play as much as they want, because hey, what else are you supposed to do when you're not working.

America has normal day/night cycles year-round everywhere outside of Alaska, so there is little or no incentive to have coping mechanisms against winter darkness. Instead, people choose to move: northern cities are depopulating, while Florida is growing at lightning speed. That, and taking advantage of low alcohol taxes in most regions, because the only places where playfulness is socially acceptable are where alcohol is served.

While Sweden has a much longer history and more lessons to learn from it, one thing for sure: last time different parts of America disagreed on how to run the economy, it didn't end well. So let's be Civil and not start a War over this. (See what I did there?)

I'm just being a little provocative against Sly279.

It's possible that there are cultural differences, but in my experience being playful as an adult in Sweden is not really accepted unless it is a special environment like cruises or when you are heavily drunk at a party.

Also, I'm not living anywhere near the polar circle.