Do you use this forum for dating/hookup/romantic interests?

Post Reply New Topic

Likewise here ~ dog posse yay, and of course equally yay to every other astrological posse, dude, dudette and otherwise.

I recall the thread, as I was really stoked that someone else was into the gut flora thing ~ and then the thread got locked! Things got a bit heavy going for me with that as I could not then answer your question about further links, and I have never been involved with a locked thread before ~ so I was totally clueless about how to cope with that one.

Regarding the context thing I did a pot luck session on dictionary options and this came up:

Leery | Definition of Leery by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leery

Definition of leery. : suspicious, wary —often used with of. leery of strangers.

If that helps any?

I’m in the middle of reading the BEST ASD study I’ve ever seen, thanks to someone (you?) sharing a short article about a study involving a Dr. Li. I’ll share it after I’ve read it. I’m also going to contact every Doctor and researcher involved in the study - they’re from various countries.

It was locked after a RainbowUnion called me offensive insulting names and then requested that the thread be locked because he is he single most vocal anti-treatment forum member and does not believe that ASD is an ailment that should be treated and does not believe that treatments should be developed and available to those who would like them for themselves.

Is what it is, but the best thing that came out of that thread was enough info to find this medical study and start reading it. We can all read it and then discuss it together.

I’m aware of the definition of the word “leery,” and I don’t think I’m incorrect in my interpretation of its use. Only EzraS can confirm if he’d care to chime in on the matter.

"It was locked after a RainbowUnion called me offensive insulting names and then requested that the thread be locked because he is he single most vocal anti-treatment forum member and does not believe that ASD is an ailment that should be treated and does not believe that treatments should be developed and available to those who would like them for themselves."

I read the whole lot, and completely and utterly agree with the thread having been locked.

"I’m in the middle of reading the BEST ASD study I’ve ever seen, thanks to someone (you?) sharing a short article about a study involving a Dr. Li. I’ll share it after I’ve read it. I’m also going to contact every Doctor and researcher involved in the study - they’re from various countries."

Yes it was I who provided the link, and the five pages of others. For closer to home research in the 'autism-gut-flora' field, the US National Library of Medicine has some really tidy research papers (which are all the ones I have read so far). If that sounds appealing, check perhaps one or more of the twenty titles under "autism-gut-flora" via the following link:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/?term=autism-gut-flora

With a bit of luck you will not be short of reading material or back up data on gut-flora stuff.

"Is what it is, but the best thing that came out of that thread was enough info to find this medical study and start reading it. We can all read it and then discuss it together."

Bonus

I disagree. As I pointed out earlier in the thread, threads discussing treating the digestive root cause of ASD get intentionally torpedo'd by people who are anti-treatment and then they get locked forcing the creation of a new one.

The one thing that slightly irritates me about that thread is the double standard in forum rules: Apparently it's a-okay for several other people to break the forum rules about personal attacks and call me insulting names because they don't agree with me. I don't report their posts because I'm not a tattle-tail and have never reported a post ever, but it still doesn't make it right that just because they don't agree with me (or perhaps understand or believe or w/e) that they should have free reign to say rude things to me.

But whatever, there'll be more threads discussing specific medical studies & what professional research doctors have learned and are learning.

No. Not the sort of people I would want to date. I’ve made a lot of good friends on here, though.

IMO you help to derail your own threads by getting into pointless arguments with people. If you can't rise above it, then you get dragged down by it.

It seems to be a common misconception here that mods read every single post. As over worked volunteers, I think it's a bit daft to expect them to seek out work. If you are attacked, report it, it will get dealt with. We all agree to abide by the rules by using the site, if people choose to stretch or break the rules then they can deal with the consequences or f**k off.

Yes, but IMO, stick to the facts and don't bring your sexual activities into the conversation if it's not relevant.

Arguments are not pointless when there are points to be made.

Like I said, I'm not a rat. That doesn't mean others should have free reign to post insults towards me.

I didn't say anything about my sexual activities - I left that part out. I explained why I wasn't staying online when asked.

At one time I did religiously. These days, not so much.

But if there was someone on here who I connected with and had the same interests, and lived near me, they would definitely be considered.

Last edited by Tim_Tex on 20 May 2018, 6:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Good luck, peace out!

Yeah, that's a big one. I think I've met one AS person ever that I would have dated, otherwise nope (and not for AS, just never met another one I was into).. but there are plenty on here that are great for discussing things with.

I don't want to drag up your terminology again but you're not seeing why it could be construed differently , no you didn't mention any sexual activities but these are your choice of words to a member who is a minor.

Uh-huh, and?

I was being factual. He was a cute boy. I'm not attracted to masculine men; I'm attracted to cute boys. I also followed up and stated that he was 21 years old. I never said "Hold on, I'm waiting for a child to come to my house for pedophile purposes," or anything of the like. It's a bizarre stretch of the imagination to misinterpret "21 year old," for "underage child."

I think he was trying to point out there are appropriate and inappropriate topics to talk about with minors.

I don't know why you wont just take accountability for not realising you crossed a boundary. It was no doubt an unintended consequence of autism, so people would be more understanding if you just admit you were wrong than continually insulting the intelligence of every individual who challenges your behaviour.

I'm not accusing you of anything , i'm just pointing out how others might see it but maybe it's just me , i'm only trying to help

Someone who is 17 years old is not unfamiliar with the fact that people date/have sex. Many high school aged minors are doing exactly that. It's not inappropriate for anyone to say something along the lines of "I have a hot date tonight!" to someone who is 17 years old in the least bit. Many 17 year olds do & say exactly the same things - I know - I was 17 once, and have been around a lot of young people I've worked with etc. Get real. This isn't the Victorian era or anything where even the most surface level discussion of human sexuality is considered taboo.

Because I did not cross a boundary and you're being weird about it. I was asked what I was doing, so I disclosed. I was pressed for further information, so, I was transparent about it. I did not say anything explicit or obscene. Grow up. I will not admit to wrongdoing when I've done nothing wrong whatsoever. Now, if you're someone who feels shameful for having a dating or sex life and choose not to ever mention it to anyone in any capacity, that's your choice for yourself - but you cannot project the way you feel about these things in life onto others and suggest that they live their lives by your rules for yourself. That's it, that's all.