A frustrating dealbreaker

Post Reply New Topic

It can be quite hard being an aspie in my late-20s and looking for a relationship.

I don't have a job and I still live at home. To many people my age, who are now looking to settle down, this seems to be a major dealbreaker to them and they even go ahead and put this on their online dating profiles.

I personally had an experience last year where I met a girl online who seemed to be as perfect a match as can be (same interests, live close by, etc). We had one date and had a second one scheduled. Pretty much the day before the second date (and immediately after I came home from a weekend at the cottage), she broke things off with me, saying that she wanted to be with someone more outgoing and more "established in life".

I do have a goal in which I want to find a job and move out within the year, but I am beginning to realize that kickstarting my career is going to be a very long and slow process (since I need to build experience through my volunteering) and I am even starting to look into other income sources (i.e. disability supports).

It's actually a bit of a catch-22: Being in a relationship with someone would probably help a bit with my self-esteem during my job search, however most girls my age seem to expect me to have a job before starting a relationship with me.

It really sucks.

You finally realized the 3 major import things in order to be at least eligible for dating: a job, a home(yours) and being available. For me, where I live it's a job , a car (since getting homes is quasi-impossible for one person, here people get house loans based on two salaries but a car is crucial for having a social life) and being available.
People of late 20s are expected to have those.

TBH,I realized that seeking dates through online dating without having those 3 columns is a waste of time.

It sounds like she's doing it clunkily by the book as it were. Instead of medium step by medium step, feel and texture, does it feel like positive energy going forward, trusting the heart as it were. Which I think is by far the better approach.

But, if she's mistaken, you've got to let her by mistaken. Sounds like these dating sites kind of enhance whatever superficial behavior is already there and push it more in that direction.

Around 1998, I join Great Expectations video dating. It cost $1,600. I was in my mid-thirties and working as a private school math teacher. Well, what the sales person didn't really tell me was that most of the women were older and richer. So, they wanted guys with even "better" jobs, even though teaching is a positive job that pushes society forward. Then, the photography guy tried to sell me a package of photographs for "instant messages" So, it wasn't just the 1,600 dollars, it's that push another 400 for the photos. Then this lady interviewing me, who at one point sound she wanted to meet a guy who was socially responsible, at a later point said, 'well, I've been looking at some of your selection . . . not that I really believe people are in different categories and classes.' I should have just allowed myself to be visibly stunned and appalled, Wow, and repeat some of her phrases, 'Don't really believe people are in different categories' 'Wow' 'loud and clear' 'I think we better reschedule this.' And use this as an occasion to ask if she will recommend a refund for me, which out of her embarrassment, she might do, or not. People are funny. I also heard a story of a person picketing the place.

I did meet one woman at the Sierra Club, although it didn't really work out. And for all the problems and in-fighting of the Sierra Club, I guess like any other organization, I did feel it was a more accepting environment.

Last edited by AardvarkGoodSwimmer on 30 Apr 2011, 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I haven't "finally realized" anything. I was aware of this for quite a while. My goal with this topic is to bring to light what I believe to be a very shallow way of thinking.

This supposed condition for dating does nothing for me but bring anxiety, since it gives me the mindset that I can't get a girlfriend until I get a job and move out. However, if I was in a supporting relationship, I would probably be able to be more at ease with finding work.

Just because I live at home doesn't make me less of a person, I really wish that I meet someone who can accept this.

It's 10% unemployment (approximately, in the United States, I suspect Canadian is largely the same). This is the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression, which in honesty was quite a bit worse. But what we have going on right now is worse than the stagflation of the 1970s, is worse than Reagan's early economic downturn in 1981-82, and is worse than the recession during 1992 that cost President Bush, Sr his re-election bid.

And even without that, there are fewer middle class jobs, as a percentage of the population, than there were at certain high-water marks in the late 1960s, early 70s. It is absolutely a social justice issue.

And I am very open to what you are saying, people should be appreciated for character, interests, contributions to society (and I mean non-monetary), personality, sense of humor, heart, and a lot of things. Not just on how much money a person makes.

I lived on my own from 1982-84 (when I first started college), then from 1985 all the way to Oct 2008, yes, more than 20 years on my own, some financial help from my parents, but a variety of jobs, a variety of artistic and intellectual projects. Since Oct 2008, I have been back living with my parents and it has been damn difficult.

if i was considering someone for dating, i think i would have mixed feelings about these kind of situations.

first of all, i should state that money is not an issue for me - i was the major breadwinner for many years, and my husband was a stay-at-home dad at various times. he always extensive activities that kept him busy, like studying philosophy, creating art, selling vintage books online, going to university, etc.

for me, it is extremely important that any partner have a lot of passion for accomplishing things in their life. i don't mean major accomplishments for the external world, but rather projects or activities that have a strong purpose for that person. if a person isn't working it's not a huge deal but if that person also has no plans for the future, no goals to achieve, no fulfilling or mentally stimulating daily activities, then they simply would not be a good match for me.

i think i would question the reasons that the person isn't working at all. mental health issues? social phobia? can't get along with other people? none of these things are knock-out factors, but i would want to know the reasons behind the unemployment. and it is hard to get to know the answers to questions like that without really really getting to know a person first. online dating is NOT conducive to getting to know a person that thoroughly.

for me, the idea of a person living with their parents is a similar issue. i would want to know what their future plans are, and how long they had been living in that arrangement. many many people (including myself) have spent time back at the parents' house after unsuccessfully attempting to live alone. but it was a temporary arrangement, and i don't know how i'd feel if a potential partner did not plan to try to become more independent.

living with a parent can seem to imply a lack of independence, but i think that living with a spouse can mean the same thing! for me, nothing is ever written in stone so if i had the chance to get to know a person's situation before dating, then issues like not having a job or living with parents may be fine. and i've met plenty of adults who were very dependent on their parents even if they didn't live at the same house.

in some ways living with a parent can be like having a roommate, but again it would take a great deal of time and effort to get to know someone well enough to figure out the situation, and once again... online dating really doesn't allow for that.

online dating doesn't cater to people being openminded and making exceptions. online dating allows people to filter out candidates according to what they *think* they really want, and it ultimately encourages people to be very judgemental and exclusive. if a person is unusual or different or atypical in some way, online dating could be very hard.

I don't bother trying anymore because I know that my life situation is an instant dealbreaker for the majority of women. It's very frustrating to establish some interest only to have it whipped away once they find out my socioeconomic status and living arrangements.

I can relate, since I always found these dating requirements incredibly stupid. When I asked one if my female friends some time ago how to attract girls, how to become desirable, she told me the exact same thing: When she is looking for a partner, she wants someone who has something to offer, who is good looking and independened, and who has got experience with women, and most women are looking for that. The last part caught my attention, and it got stuck in my memory pretty well, as it describes the conundrum of finding someone astonishingly precise for me: In a nutshell, she just told me that, in order to get a girlfriend, I had to get a girlfriend first.
The only hope in matters of jobbing I have is that after my finals, I might get a place as Ph.D. student, which will probably delay the inevitable by three or four years.

hyperlexian, I generally like your post very much. I take it you're saying whatever mental map a person has of what they are looking for, online dating pushes it in a more superficial direction (paraphrase). Do I have that approximately right?

However, the following part I do find frustrating (esp since it very much affects me).

I mean, what part of 10% unemployment do you not understand, or do you really believe our meritocracy is that smoothly functioning? I think, sure, okay, we have a meritocracy, but it's kind of a creaking, croaking meritocracy that sort of works. There are plenty of good people out of jobs, or who are way underemployed, esp now. And for those of us who are quirky, creative, off-beat, many of those good traits work against us in formal stiff corporate environments. (I did like what you had to say about having passions and projects and activities.) So, yes, a person can learn to play the game, have a good resume, consistently get there slightly early, etc, etc, and I guess live outside of work. And that part is a little sad.

temporary unemployment is different from permanent unemployment, and i think most people make allowances based on that. and i wouldn't necessarily care either way anyways, which i did also state. but many women are not of the same mind, unfortunately.

There is unfortunately kind of this negative feedback, alluded to by SPKx, that once a person is unemployed for a time that can be the primary thing a corporate HR dept looks at. (being back in school can be a remedy) And so, sadly, temporary unemployment can become (somewhat) permanent unemployment.

And yes, I do appreciate your honesty that, whereas you do not, a lot of women do put a lot of focus on jobs/employment/income.

In the same sense of what you said, a prolonged temporary singlehood might lead to a permanent singlehood. A lot of girls when they know that a 29 years old never been in a relationship before would think something like "There's must something wrong in that guy" (and they're right, it's something abnormal ,not right....).

Building your resume and experience through volunteering may be your main path, and a good main path. At the same time, I really encourage you to think of it in terms of multiple paths. There is a great deal of luck involved in jobs, including whether a boss is a reasonable individual and believe it or not some actually are, so it's kind of the zen art of allowing the good thing to drop into your life and rolling with the good thing, really .

And also please consider school as one of your paths. As someone now is his late 20s, yes, you have a richer set of skills to draw upon. And a 'student' is often accorded more respect than an unemployed person, even if it's just one or two classes.

And if you run a service business out of the home, like tutoring or computer repair or maybe Internet music, you can start that business, still a long shot as are all entrepreneurial businesses, but start it orders of magnitude cheaper than some kind of store front.

And maybe an occasional vacation where you stay with other relatives (to give both you and your parents a break)?

And I recommend pursuing free positives, esp esp during a difficult period.

Last edited by AardvarkGoodSwimmer on 30 Apr 2011, 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Not statistically normal. But like the Andy character in '40 Year Old Virgin,' once the Trish character got to know him just a little bit, she realized he was a heck of a good guy and a real gem. And actually, their relationship would have gone even better if he had told her like mid way.

And actually, a slightly older woman like in her mid thirties, might find it refreshing. And some younger woman might also. I generally recommend, not as any kind of obligation but just expending one's horizons, for guys to be open to appreciating woman slightly older than themselves. Might not happen, but then again sometimes the magic does happen.

Last edited by AardvarkGoodSwimmer on 30 Apr 2011, 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Movies don't apply in real life. A single girl usually has several options (several guys asking her out), so she wouldn't risk it with a guy who never had a relationship by investing time to know him better (ie. "There's must be something wrong with this guy...but maybe not ....let's give him a chance with a couple of dates!! ! Maybe he turns out to be great!" = very unlikely to happen, in real life ,she would just skip him for another) , unless if she has a crush on him.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 30 Apr 2011, 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I agree, kind of like the standard 'human resource' dept not taking the time or chance getting to know someone better, and finding out that the nontraditional job candidate is actually a pretty good individual.

At the same time, even given my estimate that only 1 out of 9 groups really work out (like Sierra club, like kayaking club, like local Democratic party), social skills such as turning my internal censor to "probably okay to say it" (unless it really jumps out that it's inappropriate), being a builder, being attune to defending someone if they come under group attack, happens even to the best group. Maybe other people are ahead of me, but adding those kind of social skills pays modest dividends and sometimes big dividends, just not in any kind of predictable way.

I remain an optimist! (in spite of all evidence to the contrary)