When people are telling you what you think

Post Reply New Topic

If I don’t see but they might, it means I don’t know something they do. So I would like you (and others) to explain to me those things I don’t know.



Like which behaviors?



If certain behaviors are “blood test” for stalker, then altering them would be akin to cheating on a blood test. Dishonest, isn’t it. Wouldn’t it be more honest to simply explain to people that this blood test doesn’t work?

Instead of faking blood test result it would be a lot more honest to say that my actual score is irrelevant.



How many years did it take you? I am 42 years old, I don’t have a decade to work on my voice, especially since I want a wife and kids.

"Why, why, why . . ."

Do you really need to argue about it?

You know what the problem is, you know what causes it, you know what to change, and you also know that only you can make the necessary changes that will alleviate the problem.

Of course, you could just wait for certain other members of this website to muddle the facts and derail the thread, while convincing you that you really do not have any problem at all.

Way I see it, if you are going to talk to a girl about yourself but never about her, you talk about your ex's to her, you never smile, you don't offer the common courtesy of a greeting, and you are prone to anger, logic or not how do you expect to attract a girl.

Here is a real life story to illustrate my point. I read about ftm transgender who used tools to deceive her cis female partner that she was a man. Once discovered, she was, rightly, charged with the rape.

Now, purposely altering my voice would be akin to it. Women don’t want to date someone who was BORN with flat voice, just like they don’t want to date someone who was born a woman. Purposely altering my voice is similar to lying to them.

The reason I believe that they are concerned about my voice at birth rather than at present is because of the belief that monotone voice is an indication of a stalker. The only way to make sense of that belief is that they think that there are biological differences in people with antisocial behavior, and those same biological differences cause monotone voice. In this case, training my voice not to be monotone is not going to change those differences any more than taking certain meds that suppress Covid symptoms would make one less contagious. Therefore, based on this logic, they wouldn’t want to associate with someone who “used to have” (past tense) a certain voice, regardless of whether they retrained their voice or not. Therefore, by retraining my voice, I am basically misleading women into thinking I am someone I am not. Dating through misleading is both unfair towards a woman as well as emotionally unfulfilling for me: she won’t be liking the real me, she would be liking the person I masqueraded myself as.

Now, I realize that women don’t see me for real me in either case. If I don’t retrain my voice, they assume I am stalker which I am not. If I do retrain my voice, they assume my voice always had inflections when it didn’t. So it’s like they wouldn’t see the real me in either case. I just have to choose between a charming mask and a creeper mask. But the real emotional connection requires to be seen as real me, and being deprived of that option puts me into a no-win situation.

As far as talking about myself, talking about ex’s, and anger, those three things only come out in extremely rare occasions when I am lucky to be talked to on the first place. Yes, it is frustrating when I wait so long for those occasions just to blow them in those stupid ways, but what is even more frustrating is why are those occasions so rare to begin with.

And while trying to answer the latter question, I am left with lack of greeting, lack of smile and the monotone voice. All three of those things are about aloofness. Yet, as Fnord said, they make me come across as a creep. Hence the question: why is being aloof gets lumped together with being a creep?

Here is yet another illustration to support my point. Remember the movie “just friends”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Friends

So the recap of that movie is that Chris was friendzoned in high school by Jamie because he was overweight. Then, 10 years later, Chris lost weight and became a movie producer. So a different girl, Samantha, only knew him after he lost weight, not before. That’s why Samantha liked him. On the other hand, Jamie knew him back when he was overweight, that’s why Jamie still didn’t like him, even after he lost weight. However, Chris liked Jamie and not Samantha. So the whole rest of a movie is about how Chris was chasing Jamie while Samantha was chasing Chris.

Now, leaving aside everything about Samantha’s personality, let’s ask the following question. Pretend you never seen that movie, and all you have is just the above paragraph. Based on that paragraph, do you think Samantha’s love of Chris was genuine? No, because it was based on lack of information: namely, Samantha didn’t know Chris was overweight back in high school. If Samantha were to know it, she wouldn’t have liked him, just like Jamie didn’t.

After all, Jamie saw that Chris lost his weight, didn’t she. So the fact that it didn’t cause her to like him shows that her likes were based on how Chris was born, as opposed to how he was as an adult. By that logic, Samantha’s likes were also based on how Chris was born. But, unlike Jamie, Samantha didn’t have access to that information. So she was forced to guess he was born skinny because he was skinny as an adult. Samantha’s guess was wrong. So she liked Chris based on false information, which is what ultimately made it fake.

So if I were to retrain my voice and get women to like me, their love would be just as fake as Samantha’s. Just like Samantha only liked her idea of Chris (someone who was skinny all his life) rather than real Chris (someone who used to be fat and then became skinny), similarly the women would like their idea of me (someone whose voice had inflections his whole life) rather than real me (someone whose voice used to be monotone but then was re-trained to have inflections).

By the way, I hope you agree it is unfair to judge people for their weight. Well, judging them for their voice is even worse, in the following way. If you are overweight, they won’t accuse you of being a creeper; they would just accuse you of being lazy and/or glutton. But, for having monotone voice, they would in fact accuse you of being a creeper. Well, I would much rather be accused of being a lazy glutton, rather than a creeper. So if it is not okay to accuse people of being lazy gluttons due to things they can’t help, why is it okay to accuse people of being creepers due to things they can’t help?

This is very dependent on local culture.

My boyfriend has a speech impairment. He has lived in many different places around the U.S.A., and, everywhere he has lived except New York City, he has been treated like crap because of his speech impairment. Here in NYC, this is much less of a problem, especially in a highly multicultural neighborhood like ours, which has immigrants from many different countries around the world. Here, his speech impairment is just another accent.

Here in NYC also, people tend to more aloof, at least with strangers, than they are in many other places. So, in some parts of NYC, you might fit right in.

I'm not gonna read 3 pages of replies, I haven't been up long & don't have focus to.

Your right. Trying to be friends 1st before pursuing a romantic relationship sometimes got me put into the closeted gay friend category & they freaked out when I actually did make a move on them I think these scenarios may be an issue where the women feel like they were lied to &/or they are unsure what to make of the situation. Most people are NOT very logical & people generally do not want to admit to themselves that their impressions are wrong. In cases like these it may be easier to point their finger at the guy for confusing them than to admit that their impressions were wrong.

That’s the other biggie. So, it’s not *just* them frirndzonning you, but them also thinking you are *gay*, for no reason what so ever?

So how can I find out whether people assume I am gay? In your case your friends told you. But in my case I don’t have friends, so how can I know?

And, back to the double edged sword thing. So, to reiterate what you just said: if you go too slow, they assume you are gay. If you go too fast, they assume you are rapist. But wait a second: gays are only 5% of a population and rapists are only 5% of a population too. So are you saying that 90% of a population know how not to err in either direction? Well, it’s not 90%, it’s them assuming it’s 90%. But are you saying that at least 80% know how not to err, and that way they can mistake 80% for 90%

So, are you saying 80% of guys would hit on every girl that talks to them, in order to justify the thinking that the rest of the guys are gay?

And if it was true, why would they assume aspies are creeps when aspies probably don’t hit on every girl the way 80% of NT guys do?

I guess it’s not only gay and stalker things. Another example is my ex, back when we were dating, assuming that if Skype malfunctions it means I am cheating on her with another girl. In her case I blamed it on her being overly sheltered. But if I put it side by side with the other things I just mentioned, could it be that it’s not her but people in general? As in, people are willing to assume extreme stuff in response to simple faux passes?

On a different note, I was told that people don’t owe me anything. So my mindset that “I *have* to have a girlfriend” or “she *has* to give me a chance” would remind people of a rapist, even if I don’t belong to that category. But here is why I think in those terms. If the reasons for her *not* giving me a chance is her assuming I am either a gay or a rapist, then yes I almost want to say she owes me a chance. But not for reasons people tend to assume. She owes me not to think I am rapist or gay. So if “not” giving me a chance means that she thinks one of these two things, then this implies she owes me a chance.

I was also told not to overthink things because “sometimes it just doesn’t work out”. But again let’s go to your example. When you don’t hit on a girl, the girl doesn’t think “maybe you are attracted to a different kind of women”. No: she instead thinks “maybe you are gay”. So the assumption here is that if you are not gay, then you would be hitting on women indistinguishably. Well, if you follow this line of thinking, then the idea that “maybe I am just not her type” doesn’t have a room either. Instead, it has to be “she assumes I am either a creeper or gay or some other extreme out there”. So why are people telling me to think along “maybe it just didn’t work out” lines, if they themselves don’t think that way?

And by the way, I am not saying a girl should assume that “maybe you are attracted to a different kind of women”. I think she should consider a possibility that maybe you are attracted TO HER and are just too shy to express it. But, at the same time, the assumption that you are attracted to a different kind of woman is not damaging, the assumption that you are gay is. So, before I was 21, I could care less whether girls assume I am attracted to different kinds of girls, or if they assume I like them just shy, or what. I simply assumed they don’t assume anything character damaging. And, under that particular assumption, I decided I don’t have time for a girlfriend I should focus on physics. But then, when I was 21, I learned that oh yes they do assume damaging things (maybe not gay, but other things similarly damaging). So *that* was when I decided I *must* have a girlfriend in order for my character not to be assassinated.