philosophical approach to relationship problems

Post Reply New Topic

Few days ago my girlfriend broke up with me, and I was really trying to take a deep look at myself in order to single out some things I can change in order to avoid future situations. I think I am really onto something in terms of the fact that I have to change the outlook on things.

All of my past relationships were sharing one common feature. At first things would go well, the woman is in love with me, etc. I would try to be perfect and make sure everything I do is okay with her. Okay, I know the insecurity in itself is a big turn off for a lot of women. But given that I am concentrating on a minority who DID give me a chance, obviously they are a big exception to whom it doesn't apply, so I have to look further.

Anyway, once things were good for a while, I assume that they will always be good, so I relax somewhat. Then I would "accidentally" make a mistake. At worst it is a small mistake that could be easilly forgotten if I only let it go. At best, it wasn't noticed on a first place, but rather a woman was busy or something and I simply read into it too much and tried to overanalyze everything I did untill then.

On any event once the "mistake" is made, I would look for ways to undo it. In cases of most women, these can be passive agressive ways of manipulating the situation to force her to adress an imagined issue without ever bringing it up myself. Alternatively, I might apologise for it, but if I won't hear a reassurance in just as intence form as I want to hear, this would lead to some form of an outburst. On the other hand, if I am dealing with a needy woman such as my most recent girlfriend who loves attention, then I might take advantage of it and do the opposite: push an issue for hours and hours and not pay attention to when I hear "I am tired of discussing it". On any event, the one common result of all of the above situations is that I turn a tiny to non-existant problem into a huge one that eventually leads to breakup.

Now it is one thing to see a problem and it is another thing to find a way of how to change. I think I finally found a way of logically convincing myself to act otherwise, namely by re-interpretting what is to blame. In the past, even though I fully realized that the biggest problem was caused by my subsequent behavior, I was still thinking that original "small mistake" is to blame. Granted, I knew that the "small mistake" wouldn't have caused any problem if I didn't dwell on it. But still, who cares what is in the other people's head. After all, my head is the reason of why I was acting neurotically ever since and thus causing problems. So, as far as MY HEAD is concerned, the mistake number 1 is what caused me to be obsessive, so mistake number 1 is to blame. In other words, I was thinking that the "strategy" of dealing with my over-reactions is to simply be perfect. Hence, even when the real problem is obsessive behavior going on for weeks, the failure of being perfect at day 1 is still to blame.

Well, right now I realized that it is a wrong thinking. What is to blame is NOT a mistake number 1, but rather my assumption that everything is constant. In fact, lets even forget the whole issue of creating NEW problems. Suppose the other person is infinitely patient and don't mind the fact that I have to dwell on everything. Still, there is one more problem. Namely, one way of trying to undo whatever I did wrong is to explain all of my thought processes back at the time when I was doing it, in order to convince the other person that I did it because of X, Y, and Z as opposed to just trying to be mean. On the other end of a line, however, this might sound like a statement that I am going to CONTINUE to do it, precisely because of X, Y, and Z. In other words, I am not going to change.

Now, I was viewing it as a communication problem and was thinking that IF ONLY the other person had more patience, then they would understand. But now I finally realized: it is not just a communication problem, it is a faulty logic one. Since no one is perfect, lets imagine the situation where I actually ran onto something where I AM in fact wrong. In this case, the only way to change is to admit that I was wrong. Since strict logic is never wrong, being wrong ultimately implies having gaps in my logic. Therefore, if I insist on describing my logic in every detail in order to justify my past behavior, I am forced to insist that my logic has no gaps, and therefore I am forced to insist that I was NOT wrong, which implies that I am planning to continue to act in just the same way.

So, ironically, the MORE I am obsessed about having been wrong, the LESS I am likely to learn from that mistake. And that is the one thing that lead me to constant frustration. On my end of the line I was thinking that I was obsessed about it SO MUCH that OF COURSE I will do EVERYTHING to fix it IF ONLY I will be given slightest chance. But on the end of a line of another person I was given plenty of chances and I never used any, so they are done becuase I just can't change. I was thinking how dare they say I can't change if I am SO obsessed about having to. But actually this very tendency of being obsessed IS the reason I couldn't change!! !

So THIS is what I have been missing. I never viewed myself as wanting to be right. Quite the opposite, I was asking everyone to tell me just in what way am I wrong, just so that I can see a bigger picture. However, whenever I got the answer to such a question, it ultimately lead to rebutals. On the one hand, I was perfectly willing to be wrong, which is why I called for a discussion. But on the other hand, I was NOT willing to avoid the impulse to "explain myself". ANd this very need of "explaining myself" forced me to NEVER admitting any of my mistakes.

Now lets try to step back and generalize it into a life philosophy. Why do I need to explain myself so much? Becuase I am assuming I never change. If I never change, then any and every mistake I ever make has to be eternal. So this means that I have no choice but trying to "undo" it. On the other hand, again since nothing changes, if that was the only mistake I have made SO FAR, I am eternally immuned from any other mistake. Hence, I might as well do anything and everything as long as it gives me a chance to dwell on the one single eternal mistake that needs to be un-done.

On the other hand, in real life things DO change. The change requires an admission of being wrong. Also, the change requires an admission of having logical gaps -- after all logic never changes. Thus, the change requires simply letting go of my mistake and act differently.

Now, lets switch a subject into an issue when, in fact, I am RIGHT and it is another person who mis-read me. Yes, I still say that this is quite common due to my Asperger. But, lo and behold, again it is exact same mistake. The only difference is that this time instead of being wrong in saying that I never change, I am wrong in saying that the other person's perception of me never changes.

Granted, the other person thinks I am guilty of X and I am not. But who is to say that just because they are saying that I am guilty of X at the moment, it means they will be always saying it? Quite the opposite, since I know that X was done by accident, I also know that I won't be repeating it in similar situations. However, since the other person only seen me in 3 different settings, they still say that I made this mistake once out of 3 times, which is quite a few. On the other hand, if I let time pass for them to know me across 1000 settings, they will see that I did X once out of 1000 times, and then they will know it is an accident.

On the other hand, due to my OWN assumption that nothing changes, I am forced to dwell on whatever miscommunication happened. This constant dwelling would ultimately drive the other person nuts and force them to end all contact with me. Then I would blame it ALL on the "little" misunderstanding (after all this is what forced me to be neurotic, right). Thus, the whole experience will only re-inforce my views that nothing changes, and thus make me repeat that exact mistake in new situations.

Interestingly, I have been wondering why do OTHER PEOPLE assume that I never change instead of giving me a chance. So this is a case of "we see the world the way we are". The truth is that I am the one who was assuming that nothing chnages, hence I was the one who acted like someone non-teacheable due to constant self-justification, and ultimately forced other people to treat me that way.

It is true, however, that in some cases people DID judge me too fast. But the thing is taht I asked for it by laying out tones of highly personal information. Why did I do it? Well, if I say SOMEHTING about myself, I better say everything else that logically relates to it in order to give the other person a "full picture" so that they won't fill in gaps a wrong way. But instead of them seeing "more accurate" picture, they end up being "wrong" and thus forcing me to try to correct their misunderstandings, which ultimately lead to a lot of frustration in their part.

What was driving me was the fact that I couldn't get how could other people get inacurate understading when I have given them so many detailes. But again the irony of the situation is that the amount of detailes IS the reason for their misconceptions! For example, an average person who wants to keep his girlfriend from his mom will simply say "things will be less complicated this way" or "this is a personal issue", etc. On the other hand, I felt that I HAD to explain the whole situation about keeping things from my mom. After all, there were few girls who thought I did so because my mom disapproved of my dating non-Jews and this is NOT it. So, I better explain things in detail in order to avoid THIS misunderstanding. However, once the other person understood that Jewishness is not an issue, this opened pandora's box for a number of emotional issues to attribute to either me or my mom that are no longer rationalized away by simple religious belief.

For example, I was perceived as being attached to my mom, even though from my perspective it is my way of keeping distance from my mom (i.e. just the OPPOSITE to being attached). Why is that? Well, in case of SOME families when the parent disaproves of what their kids are doing they would distant themselves. So, if you are attached to your mom you would make sure to stay within her approval. On the other hand, in case of my family, my mom only gets more and more overprotective. Hence, in my case I keep things from her in order for there to be a distance. So, THIS part also needs to be explained, and I forgot to explain it.

So, on a surface my mistake was that I "forgot" to explain the way in which my mom is overprotective. In other words, I should explain even more. However, if you think more about it, explaining more won't solve a thing. After all, when I was thinking that I would avoid misconception of my mom not approving my dating non-Jews, I instead caused a misconception about my being attached to my mom. So who is to say that by correcting the misconception of my being attached to my mom by giving even more detailes about relationship between me and my mom I won't cause some misconception that I can't even think of? In other words, if I stick with a line of though that I have to explain MORE, then I will end up explaining things INDEFINITELY.

There is actually far deeper mathematical/philosophical issues here. I was assuming that there has to be LOGICAL explanation that has finitely many steps. Thus, after I explain all these steps, no more misunderstandings will follow. But what I should know from any math class is that any kind of proof is based on a set of axioms, and these axioms are taken for granted. If I insist on having to explain them, it will only force me to invent other axioms plus at least one more step in my logical proof. And then if I want to explain the other axioms, it will force me to invent yet other ones, etc. Hence, if I want to explain EVERYTHING it will take infinite amount of time, and hence it is impossible.

In math people happened to have the same set of axioms, so thats why it APPEARS like a proof with finitely many steps. In real life this isn't a case. Hence, no matter what axioms I start off with, it will lead to frustration of my finding out that the other person has a different set of the axioms.

Now, as hopeless as it might sound, here is something that MIGHT work. People's axioms are all based on observation. Even in math, the reason we are willing to postulate things like points and straight lines is because we have SEEN little stones (i.e. points) and railroads (i.e. straight lines). On the other hand, the reason no one likes to postulate quantum mechanics is that we never seen such phenomena with our eyes. So, by this line of thought, the axioms that the other person is using in trying to interprete my behavior will change as they observe me across different settings.

But there comes another problem: the interpretation of their observations will be based on their existing ideas. This, in fact, is what was forcing me to explain myself. However, there is a different answer to this problem: simply DON"T GIVE them any "ideas" right from the start. So, if my introduction is super long, then I am right, all of their subsequent observations will be based on how they read my intro, so I BETTER try to fill in all the gaps. On the other hand, if my intro is as short as "hey how are you", then I am giving other people chance to make more objective observations.

True, their first observation might be shaped by their experience with other people. But since I haven't given them any clues of whom to compare me to, different kinds of misconceptions are more likely to "balance each other out". After all, they will be taking the information SLOW, little by little. So suppose today they will mistake towards left. But you see, due to the relative unimportance of the issue, it isn't enough to force them to make the mistake tomorrow towards the left. So tomorrow the mistake is made towards the right and everything is balanced. On the other hand, if I start giving long explanations, then OF COURSE mistaking one part of an explanation towards the left will force to mistake all the other parts of it towards the left, since it is in the same context. So now they have 1000 misconceptions towards the left and none towards the right. So now this basically set a stage for them to mistake things towards the left from now on.

So to sum it up, what I have realized in this whole post is:

1)The MORE I am dwell on my mistakes the LESS I am likely to learn from them (due to self justification)

2)The MORE I try to explain myself in words the MORE I am likely to be misunderstood.

In other words, it goes towards "less is more". Also trying to solve an issue actually makes that exact issue worse. Assuming nothing changes only assures it be the case. Worrying about being misunderstood and trying to explain myself only makes me more misunderstood. So what is another option? Well, speak with ACTIONS, not with words. After all, axioms are based on observation, right? So, if I want to correct some misunderstanding, it will be corrected by my future actions. And I don't even have to try to "manufacture" them. After all, if I know X is an accident, I also know that there won't be any patterns of my doing it, and thus there is no need to make any concerted effort to hide anything.

However, it is true that I am left with some things that ARE a pattern, namely things such as monotone voice or forgetting to say hello to people due to Asperger. So, true, this would push a lot of people before they ever got a chance to get to know me. But still there will be FEW left who are willing to look past that, as I know from the fact that I had FEW girlfriends. So, it might actually be good that I will be left with these few, since that is precisely a reason why I will be able to focus on trying to be less obsessive. And, of course, it will be something more stable.

Last edited by Roman on 07 Sep 2006, 4:08 pm, edited 11 times in total.

What is it you have against us ADHD suffers?

Well,I have read your other posts,so I "think" I understand most of what you are saying.I think you are on the right track with both of your conclussions.I hope you get the oppotunity to put them in practice.I am glad you can use logic to put some things that tend not to be logical into perspective.Hae you ever read anything about Rational Emotive Therapy?I dont agree with all of the theories but it does make for some interesting insightful reading and you might enjoy it...good luck.

Not every mistake needs to be fixed or is worth fixing or can be fixed. Sometimes it is better to just move on and forget about the mistake. As you have realized, trying to fix some mistakes just makes it worse. Find satisfaction in knowing that you will make an effort to avoid repeating the same mistake in future.

Roman

I have probably misunderstood what you have tried to say because it is long and convoluted and hard to follow. Is that my fault for being too lazy to re-read it twenty times or your fault for not being more concise or a bit of both?

You're not perfect. Mistakes are going to be part of the deal. If you change your mind about a previous decision - all anyone else needs is the update, and maybe why you made the new decision (might help them anticipate your needs if they know why you make the choices you do). Nobody needs to know why you made the old choice. Seriously this could only lead to confusion and more choices you want to unmake later.

Before you start obsessing - you might want to consider what emp wrote: does it really matter?

I will usually pick a deliberate fight or disagreement over something trivial with a newish boyfriend - as we start getting a bit serious - to see if we can get through it. I believe that all people disagree from time to time and if you have a serious relationship - if the first fight you have is going to kill it - might as well do it sooner rather than later (when it hurts more). I pick the fight to see if the other would prefer to be right no matter what the consequence (especially over something trivial), if the other is prepared to compromise in order to please me, if the other can actually disagree about something (have and hold their own opinion) or if they just flip flop around
trying to figure out what answer will please me.

What I'm looking for (and occasionally find) is someone who is prepared to state what they want, listen to what I want, decide if it is more important to them than to me - and stand their ground or compromise accordingly - while I do the same process for them. What I don't want is some wimp who always gives in and never says what they want or some tyrant who never gives in - even when the issue is trivial. And trust me - whether the toilet seat is up or down is trivial. Whether someone made a mess and won't clean up after themselves is non-trivial (to me, some people like cleaning up after others).

Well I guess that is the exact same mistake I am trying to adress on the first place, which makes it ironic. I was just thinking that since I can't accept anything without a long proof involved, the only way for me to accept that I should learn to be brief is to come up with a long proof for that effect, which is exactly what I was doing. Much like in math, once you come up with a long proof of a theorem, you can then "pretend" to believe in it without a proof. So, in this case, I had to prove a "theorem" that not everything needs a proof.




In most cases it isn't previous decision, but rather another person's interpretation of my THOUGHTS that needs to be corrected. A case in point is what lead to my break up with my last girlfriend, Erin. What happened right before the breakup is that she was going to introduce me to her children, both of which were under 10. At first, her son came and we spent a couple of hours together. After that we were going to meet her daughter, and most of the time where I was seeing her daughter was in our drive home which took only 10 minutes or so. After that her mom came for another few minutes and this was it.

Anyway, later during the day I called her and asked her what did her kids and her mom think about me. She said that she didn't talk to them yet, and she mentioned that by the way she was wondering whawt happened when her daughter went into the car, because I didn't say hi or anything. I explained that I didn't know what her kids expected me to do due to them being under 10 and my having Asperger, so thats why I was trying to be quiet in order not to do anything wrong.

Then she said that I was okay with her son but somehow my behavior changed when her daugher went into the car. Then I explained that if she were to videotape my behavior with her son, there were few occasional conversations that lasted few minutes, and they were separated by 20 minute periods of time when I weren't saying anything. Since the time when I had a chance to see her daughter only lasted for 10 minutes, then it simply HAPPENED to fall into the 20 minute period of my being quiet.

Anyway that conversation ended on good terms. But then I became obsessed over the fact that she didn't explicitely acknowledge the truthfulness of my "theory" of what I did, which in my head implied that she didn't believe it. So then I made a phone call to her where I basically accused her of thinking that I was mad at her daughter, and I was trying to prove to her just how ridiculous this assumption is, given that it was the first time I ever seen her daughter and thus there is no reason for me to be mad at her. Furthermore, I kept repeating my "proof" involving 10 minutes and 20 minutes.

At first she was trying to tell me that she believes me. But somehow from the fact that her answer was brief I decided that she didn't. So I then simply accused her of not believing me and started to pressure her to tell me exactly why doesn't she believe me. She was then telling me that from her point of view the whole incident is non-issue so she doesn't want to talk about it. Then I started asking her how can it be non-issue if it is HER daughter so OF COURSE if I am mad at her daughter it is important. Furthermore, I was saying that if in fact it is non-issue, then why not talk about it just for the hell of it? On any event, this lead to a day-long argument where I was screaming at her and calling her all kinds of names in order to force her to talk about the issue. After that she stopped calling me. When I called her few days later she told me she is breaking up with me.

Now, the interesting thing is that I KNOW exactly what I did wrong. It is a human politeness to acknowledge the other person's presence. So my argument about the 10 minutes of seeing her daughter accidentally falling into 20 minute period of my silence simply doesn't take this into account. After all, it is like saying that when I am alone at the house, my clothes are off some of the time; so when my landlord was comming by, it accidentally happened to fall in a time period where my clothes happened to be off. I might well convince Erin that I weren't mad at her daughter, but the point is that my very argument repeatedly appeals to the concept that her daughter is totally unimportant to me so that I regard her as a furniture.

So I guess my deal was that since I WAS guilty of her daughter being unimportant, but I was NOT guilty of having been mad at her daughter, I had to make sure that Erin has a CORRECT charge against me. Furthermore, if I verbally acknowledge that there was something wrong with "forgetting" to say hello, then Erin might simply repeat the "correct" answer I just gave her in order to find a way to end a conversation. So, I had to deliberately avoid ever acknowledging this altogether and only focus on refutting the assumption that I am mad at her daughter. Thus, if/when Erin brings the "correct" answer FIRST, I would know she actually believes it. And this is important because this is prerequisite of believing that she doesn't hold onto a WRONG charge any more.

But, of course, this very line of thought prevented me from EVER appologising for the incident. So this makes it ironic because part of what was driving me is that Erin haven't verbally "accepted my appology" out loud after the initial explanation which was brief and sweet. But what I was missing is that explanation is not an apology, so why should an apology be accepted if none was stated on the first place. So what happened on Erin's end of a line is that I was simply trying to say that I am right and everyone else is wrong no matter what, and I won't ever take responsibilty for anything.

Furthermore, lets imagine a different scenario where Erin DID finally "realize" that the issue is ignoring her daughter as opposed to being mad at her. In this case I would still feel misunderstood because now I will want to explain that the reason I am ignoring her is due to the fact that it is forgetfullness due to Asperger AS OPPOSED TO not caring about other people. In fact, in other situations that only involved Erin as opposed to her daughter, I was accused precisely of that, and that was precisely the way I responded which also lead to a long argument.

So, just for the sake of an exercise, lets talk about an imagined story of my being accused of "not caring" about Erin's daughter. Once again, I would know what is wrong with my argument. Namely, since I am consciously aware of the fact that I have Asperger's, I could have made a conscious decision to concentrate all of my energies on the 10 minutes when her daughter was there. One reason to do that was that Erin understands my condition, so I know it is okay to be quiet when it is just me and Erin. On the other hand, a 10 year old doesn't know anything is wrong with me, hence when her daughter was there I SHOULD have tried to focus more on making her feel welcome.

So probably Erin assumed taht I know all this. After all, Asperger's doesn't affect my intellectual skills. This was probably why she mentioned my being quiet in that situation despite the fact that she was used to it in so many other situations. In light of this, my argument that it was only 10 minutes could have been turned around the following way: look it was only 10 minutes, so didn't you have energy to focuse for JUST taht period of time?

So why did I have to argue if I knew what was wrong? Well, because it is still true taht I simply weren't paying attention so I had to make the other person fully acknowledge that thisi s one and only issue. So this goes back to the point of the essay. If I were to speak with my actions rather than words, I would of communicated to her this message by showing her how my behavior changes once my mistake is pointed out. On the other hand, due to the assumption that things are un-changeable I was forced to go on and on trying to explain all of my thought processes to her, thus I made myself look very defensive which ultimately lead to break up.



I guess it goes to the fact that I am not psychic and can't read minds. So even when I know for 99% that it doesn't matter there is still 1% doubt that it might. Of course, there is also 1% doubt that the plane is going to crush. But the point is that plane crushing isn't my fault; on the other hand, what happends between me and the person is. So, the fact that there is 1% chance for something to be MY FAULT makes me driven to do anything and everything to turn it into 0% which instead ends up raising it to 90%




It is funny because in my case the very FACT that I know something is trivial is what forces me to keep arguing. Because if I don't even know what "the issue" is, I feel driven to find out what it is. So the more trivial it is, the more I am clueless, and the more I am forced to argue. I also feel that since it is so trivial, the other person must be missing something by reading into it something that isn't there. So if I only explain to them the trivial logic that made me do the trivial act, then things would be fine. And since it is so awfully trivial the reason they don't get it is that they don't bother to think about it due to thinking that I am so worthless that there is no need to bother, so I just have to force them to think about it and then they will see the triviality of an issue.



I guess my previous way of thinking was that I neither wanted to do it sooner nor later. Instead, I was looking for someone who would be willing to discuss ALL the disagreements at ALL stages untill each one is settled as they come. I was assuming that Erin was the one because she is super-analyzer and in fact that is exactly what she was willing to do for over 3 months. This is why I was openly agressive with her despite the fact that with others I would typically hide it and try to force an issue from behind the scenes. However, as I just learned, eventually her patience ran out, too.



I guess what happends in my case is that in a lot of situations I might not state what I want at all and simply follow other person's opinions. However, in rare cases where I do state what I want, and it ends up not being "acknowledged" I feel that it is a form of rejection and hence I feel driven to do anything and everything to force it to be acknowledged. In other words, I fluctuate between two extremes. Either not say anything at all, or if I say something then everyone needs to listen to it.



Good point, because a lot of what I do falls into the "non trivial" category of above definition. I mean, some of the things I do wrong are forgetting to say hello or otherwise not acknowledging another person's presence. Forgetting to take a shower and brush my teeth. I guess I did find people who were willing to look past that and that is where it was coupled to my mistake on overfocusing on thigns that the other person doesn't even care to start with.

But of course this all might be part of one equation. Probably I have messed up a lot of my first dates over the fact that I haven't taken a shower. However, since no one would tell me this openly, I would be forced to overanalyze myself and come up with a lot of non-existant issues that presumably caused them to do what they did. Over the years this taught me a concept that people expect me to be perfect and thus I now have to justify even non-important issues.

After all, I am so used to not taking a shower, that there is no way I would EVER guess that it is a problem. So, if I have a strange eye desease that I can't see elephants, then OF COURSE I will start overfocusing on little insects when i am trying to explain to myself just why do everyone runs away when an elephant walks down the street.

However, at least one of my ex-s, Andrea, did tell me about the shower, and I ended up repeating the very pattern I am talking about in this post. In particular, she told me that she has noticed that I do take a shower when she is there (since she asked me to in the past) but I forget to do it when she isn't, so htat means I am trying to "get away". So on my end of a line, the only way I would be trying to "get away" is if I would PREFER to be dirty to being clean. I know this isn't the case. So I started a long explanation on how I am not deliberately trying to be dirty but I am simply forgetting to do it. However, what she heard me saying is that I was making excuses to continue not to take a shower.

Last edited by Roman on 07 Sep 2006, 4:19 pm, edited 4 times in total.

No I haven't heard of it before, but I googled it now that you told me and I can very much relate to it. Sounds like I just re-invented a wheel:)

Roman...I tend to be overly verbous person myself but even I couldnt make it through your last post...


I will make this short and sweet....

she broke up with because...WHY you couldnt interact with her daughter was not as important as the fact that you might never be able to and a "family" needs to communicate

because....you yelled at her and women are afraid of mens anger because there is so much abuse from men towards women...

because you "belaubored the point..and this is very annoying to people


you still have some things to work on befor you are ready for a healthy relationship

a)THE POINT IS THAT THE REASON *WHY* I COULDN'T INTERACT IMPLIES THE FACT THAT YES I WILL BE ABLE TO DO IT IN FUTURE. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, YOU CAN'T EXTRAPOLATE FROM JUST ONE INCIDENT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE REASON WHY WILL ALWAYS HELP YOU TO DO A MUCH BETTER JOB AT IT. OKAY LETS GET MORE SPECIFIC:


from my argument about the fact that the 10 minutes between me and my daughter simply HAPPENED to fall into a "quiet time" implies that there is no reason to think that I would NEVER be able to interract with her. In fact, her son is an example of my point. If you pick some random 10 minutes out of the interaction between me and my son, the most likely thing you will see is me being totally quiet. The reason she thought I had no problem interacting with her son is that I "made up" for it by few sentences I have said at some obscure occasions. So this means that if I were to spend more time with her daughter, I would ultimately insert these random sentences with her too. So, if she thinks I interacted okay with her son, then it would be okay by her own criteria.

b)If this was indeed a reason for her breaking up with me, then it was extremely dishonest on her part to insist how it didn't matter whenever I wanted to push an issue. It was equally dishonest that I explicitely asked her wehther or not she was breaking up with me at least three times and she was saying no.



But the point is that I have done it in the past many times and it has always been okay. The point is that she is bipolar and Asperger as well. So she is actually comming from the same place I do in a sense that she was VERY desperate in terms of needing my attention. So in light of this, I was assuming she would never break up with me, which means that I was yelling at her quite a lot for at least two or three months simply because I felt like I had nothing to lose. I was assuming that due to her Asperger she was devoit of some of the emotions that NT-s have and therefore I was immune from posibility of EVER angering her. Again, due to her Asperger, she is overanalyzing things herself, so it means that she has infinite patience to have long discussions with me.

However, about two of three weeks ago there were a sharp line when all of a sudden she no longer were saying that "it is okay" and started to defend herself each time I yell at her. Furthermore, she was no longer overanalyzing things the way she used to in the past, nor was she willing to listen to my own overanalyzing any more. So I subsequently changed my behavior in a sense that I was ONLY raising my voice as opposed to yelling. And this difference is important. Because when I try to prove my point I raize my voice quite a bit so it sounds like I yell, but I am NOT doing it on purpose. This should be contrasted with my behavior in the past when I would call her to simply yell some insulting comments to her with relation to bipolar just in order to let out a steem due to whatever happends in school or with my mom.


THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT MY BEHAVIOR HAD CHANGED TOWARDS THE BETTER IN A RESPONSE TO HER BEING FED UP WITH IT. NEVERTHELESS, IT DIDN"T CHANGE FAST ENOUGH TO "KEEP UP" WITH HER RATE OF GETTING FED UP.



Again, due to her Asperger, it had been okay for the first few months. In fact, during at least first two months of our relationship she was basically idential to me in that she was sending long winded emails (as long as mine) analyzing her own thought processes. Later she slowed down on that, mailny because I haven't had time to respond. And still it took a LONG time for her to stop sending me long emails insisting that I do respond.

Even after taht, she didn't mind to listen to my own convoluted explanations about myself. No wonder -- after all she was more than willing to do it herself. And for that exact reason, I could screw anything and everything up and then call her and explain myself for many hours and she would listen.

But then during the last two weeks it changed all of a sudden.



I would be glad to learn them. What are they?

Hi Roman

WOW - that was overwhelming. You need a summary.

Ok - the mistake with acknowledging the daughter. The short summary for immediate understanding would be

"I had complete brain fade"

A little more detail - after she says something

"I understand it is common politeness to greet another when they come into my space (ie the car) and I didn't, sorry"

then after she acknowledges she's heard and absorbed the previous bit you could add

"It doesn't mean I have anything against your daughter. Can we try again perhaps?"

Let the level of detail you go into - be lead by her questions. Don't offer vast quantities of unsolicited disorganised thought as a "proof".

About the belabouring the point over and over because you didn't believe her - yes this is very scary for a woman - you have no trust in what she says and you yell - she's best off to end the relationship with you. If this is something you do often - you need to get help so you stop. However your desire for wanting to get down to the tiniest detail and checking everything is an excellent attitude for a scientist or anyone doing research.

It's just not really helpful in a human relationship.

In conversation - The way I deal with wanting to include a proof with every point is to try to start with a summary, and only go into further detail if it is requested. When writing, I try to put a two line summary at the top and then go into progressively more detail as I write more. I have found that most people (especially men) - don't get to the end of the email / page. If they make it to the end of the first paragraph, you're doing well.

The problem with repeating what you have already had acknowledged and understood (to the best of that person's ability to understand), is that you start to sound like Lady MacBeth - when she got all "upset" over the King's death - "she doth protest too much" - makes her look like she really did do something wrong (in the case of the play and yourself - exactly right). I can't help thinking your persistance was you trying to pass off your own wrong onto someone else. Even when you knew saying hello was the appropriate thing to do and you didn't do it (you forgot?).

You are trying to "prove" that you can care and act appropriately, but by your yelling and beligerant actions you "prove" the opposite to be true. If you cannot interact appropriately with the mother - why should she believe you when you say you might be able to behave appropriately with her daughter.

Another problem with your need for mathematical style "proofs": Humans are not logical thinkers. One of the ways we humans make advances is to make illogical (sometimes accidental) connections between ideas. One of the other ways is to make painstaking methodical and logical connections - but we are where we are by both logical and illogical processes. It is pointless - trying to apply proof to your relationships. And as you have already found - it is also annoying.

When your ex said "it didn't matter whenever I wanted to push an issue" - maybe it didn't always matter to her. But sometimes it would. Sometimes it is convenient to devote an outrageous amount of time to discussing an unresolvable problem in a philosophical manner and sometimes there are other things that seem more pressing, like taking care of the children.

I can't see how anyone would want to accept having an issue pushed indefintely long - especially after they'd already understood and accepted what they needed to know - further persistance could only be like being pecked to death. If she is bipolar, what might be ok one week (or month) - will be completely unacceptable the next week - in cycles. When she says something is ok - it will only apply to right now. And next time - you will have to check again and listen to her answer as it may be different.

If I was uncertain about whether I wanted to be in a relationship (is all the yelling worth it?) and my boyfriend kept pestering me to confirm/commit - I would ditch him for that - for being so impatient.

I think you are blaming this woman far too much for problems of your own making.

And a small bit of nasty irony to finish:

She acknowledged your explanation the first time through. Then you got mad at her for not acknowledging you enough (as best I can tell). Can you see that you failed to acknowledge her acknowledgement - you denied it even.

How rude is that? - you should be able to acknowledge her as you would wish her to acknowledge you and you don't. You yell at her instead.

Well,I guess the whle thing does make more sense knowing that she has aspergers.....

It would be helpful to your understanding my resposes if you keep in mind that the only way I can "empathisize" with a situation is by projecting myself into that situation.Obviously I am not you ,I am not her,so my "reasoning" is bound to be flawed in many respects.I am doing the best I can to hopefully offer you a different "perspective" because this is something people have done for me when I have gotten "stuck" in my issues.I think thats what this forum is about?So,please keep that in mind when I say the following.....

I have "put up" with bad behavior from people I see many good qualities in.I have done so,because I know I am far from perfect and dont expect it from others and would miss the good qualities if I end the relationship.There is some behavior I could never live with,one is yelling,insulting and being treated like the person was "lucky" to have me because I think they are to socially unexceptable to get someone better...You may not have said these words to her but your actions may have finally got the message acros to her.Nobody wants to feel taken for granted.Everybody has their "last straw" moment.
Maybe she did stay in the relationship,not because the abuse was exceptable but because her selfesteem made it difficult for her to believe she deserved better,when she realized she did(and I am happy for her that she did)she ran.In this situation,it doesnt matter that you were getting better,only tht you were the kind of person who believed it was exceptable to be abusive in the first place.It really doesnt matter "why" you thought the abuse was exceptable.It doesnt matter that you were trying to improve, it doesnt matter what caused you to be upset(there will always be something to upset you)
What matters is that you did it and she didnt deserve it.You really cant blame Asperger's for your abusive behavior....there are alot of people here who are not abusive...I would say they are in the majority.

I guess the reason I haven't done that is that she is very used to my being quiet when it is just me and her, so she knows it is Asperger. Thus, I simply didn't realize that the expectations had changed now that the daughter was there. So it isn't brain fade.



But you see, the thing is that I can't read teh other person't mind so it is my GUESS that human politeness is an issue. What I wanted was for her to simply tell me what the issue is, so that I would know for sure. In order for this to happen, I was deliberately avoiding giving her any answers.



What I was scared of was that if I ask her to try again she would say yes simply because of her past pattern of agreeing with everything I say in order to get my approval. So, what I wanted to know was what was REALLY in her mind as opposed to a chance to "try again perhaps".



That is true for majority of people. But like I said due to her Asperger's she likes to overanalyze things herself, and during the first couple of months of our relationships there were a pattern of her sending me 3 page emails analyzing her own thought pattern that didn't even pertain to our relationshp but just her liking to explain herself and analyze.



That is because she didn't tell me she believed me during the FIRST conversation. Rather, neither of us was pushing an issue and we changed a subject. However, AFTER THE FACT, I began to analyze things she have said and realized that she failed to acknowledge that she believed me before changing a subject. So thats why I called her again to see if she believes me. Her first respose was "okay", which is neutral. It neither says that she believes me nor does it say she doesn't. So it looked like avoiding an answer because a real one is "no". So then I started pushing an issue which made her irritated due to my very loud voice. Plus, she was already tired of my pushing a point in a few previous disagreements we had before I ever seen her daughter. AT THAT POINT she told me that she believes me. So, clearly, the reason she did it was to get me off my back. I believe if I were to put it on tape recorder, anyone would say the same thing both judgiing by the way I could have scared her off with the intensity of my monologue as well as a tone of her voice when she said she believed me.



I do second guess people often, but in majority of cases I only do it inside of my head. In some cases I might try to manipulate a conversation to force a person to bring it up without my mentioning. Sometmes I would pose as if I believe in something OTHER than the real concern in hopes that the other person would bring it themselves in order to correct me. In a lot of cases I would try to keep it inside of me for many days and pretend that nothing is wrong, but eventually this would lead to a violent outburst.

With Erin, however, things were a lot different due to the fact that she was the one seeking my attention and pestering me with a lot of email throughout the beginning and a middle of relationship. So, I figured that since she was so much obsessed about my lack of attention during the first stages of relationship, by being obsessed about her later on I would only be giving her what she wants. So in her case I bring things up straight up, which means that she was the only one to whom I was openly saying "I don't believe you, you are lying" and things like that. However, in a lot of other cases it still came across in a form of obsessiveness, insecurity, poor communication, etc.



Okay this is a big sidetrack. But actually this was my biggest obstacle in my progress towards ph.d. due to the fact that my advisors wanted me to take certain things without a proof simply to save time. Furthermore, given that a lot of concepts of physics, as they are, are not rigurous compared to math, I was forced to pretty much do the same thing I am doing here in relatinoships by trying to re-write the philosophy behind them in my own terms. I ended up having 5 almost-finished pieces of work on philosophy of physics, however it doesn't matter for anyone concerned since all they wanted me to do was to use equations, and all the equations are still the same. So, in terms of doing what I was asked to do, I ended up being too slow and now I am in a situation where I have to desperately look for advisor at a different university to help me out with ph.d. due to the established poor reputation here.

However, this should be contrasted with coursework where, indeed, I did make an excellent progress far better than most people. I began to study calculus under supervision of my father back when I was 13. I only spent 3 years in high school, and only 3 years in college as well. Within 3 years of high school I managed to learn first 2 years of college physics and first 3 years of college math. Within 3 years of college I learned 4 math graduate courses and 4 physics graduate courses.

So I guess the thing is that due to the fact that courses have limitted amount of info I have to learn, what matters is basically my IQ, which means I do great. On the other hand, the research has un-limitted amount of information, which means that no one has high enough IQ to understand everything. So that is where it becomes important to let go of things, and that is where I lack. In fact, the total amount of work that I done is quite a lot, given that I have re-interpretted a lot of concepts of quantum field theory. So definitely IQ is not an issue. The issue is lack of willingness to accept things I "don't believe" in without having to dwell on it.

However, right now I am thinking of finding an advisor whose area of research are closer to some of my philosophical "side-tracks". For everyone concerned at this university, they were waste of time since I still ended up with the same equations just different philosophy behind it. But it seems like I am finding professors at other universities who actually seem to use a lot of concepts that happen close to the ones I was inventing. Of course, their reason for doing it is different from mine, because they are working in a field that demands this sort of thing for practical purposes rather than philosophical ones. However, for me it will just be an excuse to do what I want to do, and also to make use of what I have already done instead of accepting the fact that I just wasted a lot of time.



Yah, that is something I realized a couple of days ago that this is the NUMBER ONE thing I have to learn in order to avoid a lot of misunderstandings. To be honest, I was promissing to myself to do it time and time again, and then I didn't because each new situation had a new excuse for me not to do it just this time. However, all these excuses were based on faulty logic and now I just discovered the flaws in that logic.

So hopefully next time I will be able to do better job on being brief. It is too bad though that I don't have a lot of chances -- I am VERY isolated and I don't even know anyone's names. So taht is part of the problem, I mean how am I supposed to know what I should do in a relatinoshp if my supposed partner is the first person I have been talking to within last few months? May be this is also why i am so long winded perhaps I just THIRST for having to talk due to not having done so for so long. Anyway, I guess I will keep this brivity thing firmly in mind in order to remember to do it the next time I get an apportunity.



I never read MacBeth so I am not sure what you are referring to. I have heard of a title, but that is it; I don't know what happened in the play.

On any event, in case of myself, I only know that I did something wrong IN A RETROSPECT. I mean I haven't DECIDED to be quiet in order to be mean. So the fact that it takes a good few days of analyzing in order to "find out" what was it that I did wrong, make it sound like it is unfair to hold it against me. After all, how high my IQ is supposed to be in order to figure it out within the few seconds that are given to me in a small talk or whatever.

Okay, fine, if I spent few days of analyzing, then I can somewhat satisfy myself by saying that may be there were something SUB-CONSCIOUS that I weren't aware of (I am talking in general with misunderstandings with other people, not this particular one at hand). But the point is that everyone has subconsciousness, and they don't have a mandatory psychoanalysis done before they talk to others.

So this makes it somewhat ironic. On the one hand, I am told that my posts are way too long. On the other hand, I am expected to do ALL of this convoluted thinking within a few seconds of human interaction in order to know I am not supposed to do X, Y, and Z. So isn't it kind of opposite extremes? If I should be doing 3 pages of thougts within 3 seconds, then may be I should be writing 100-s of pages here on a board when I have unlimitted time.




No, it was an opposite effort. I was trying to FIND OUT what I did wrong. AFTER SOME THINKING, I came up with a GUESS that my forgetting to say hello might be it. But this is a GUESS since I have done the same exact thing in plenty of other cases and it was alright. So, I had to find out a REAL answer. In order to do it, I have to deliberately avoid giving her any answers. In other words, avoiding mentioning what I knew was wrong was merely a strategy of getting her to tell me about something else that went wrong, which I might have been unaware of.



I guess the point is that I was focusing at a particular event that happened at a particular time. So I weren't concerned as to whether or not she believes that I am "able" to interact either with her or with her daughter. I simply wanted to know what happened at such and such date, and in such and such time.



Once again, Erin seemed like a BIG exception to this rule, given her lengthy emails of her own self-analysis.

On a completely different note, sometimes I am not sure why the people OTHER THAN ERIN would avoid listening to logic even if it is pointed out to them? I mean, I understand we aren't logical -- I am not logical either when I am just relaxing or whatever. But if someone will ASK me a question about it, then I will become extremely logical within one second. So, if my decision was based on illogical process, there is nothing that would stop me from re-considering it.

What I learned about others by experience is that htey feel that they are somehow "bound" by their previous decisions. So thats the reason why after the flaws of their thought process are pointed out, their conclusion doesn't change because it was already made so they are "bound" by it. And that is something I can't get, I mean they haven't written any letters to president or anything.



I guess my thinking is that when you are talking about relationship you are dealing with commitment for a LONG period of time. So you BETTER make sure it is logical since stakes are so high. If it is just feelings, then you run a risk of ruining YEARS that follow over the fact that you or your partner had a bad day.



But you see, from my perspective the only thing that makes some problems unresolvable is precisely BECAUSE people won't discuss it. If they only did, then it would of been resolved since it is all about reading each other's minds which no one can do. So why not simply sit down and clarify things with words.



I think it was only 10 minutes before her patience ran out. Of course, after taht I was pushing for the whole day the point of why she doesn't want to talk about it. So in fact it WAS pushed indefinitely long. But the thing is that SHE decided to stop talking about it only after 10 minutes. There were no way for her to konw that if she were to agree to talk longer it would of been a whole day -- the only reason it was a whole day is that we were running in circels with her refusing to talk.

However, she had a good reason to refuse to talk based on PREVIOUS disagreements. One thing she told me few days BEFORE the incident with the daughter was that arguing with me is just as useless as arguing with a brick wall because no matter what she says I will always say the same thing which means I am not listening to her. Actually this is what inspired this post. I started to think just how come I am accused of NOT LISTENING if the truth is that I am OBSESSING about every word she says for many days and constantly analyze in my head every sentence that she makes. So as I was thinking I realized that perhaps this very over-analyzing is what forces me tnot to change since logic neevr changes and thus the fact that I don't change makes it look like I don't listen to her. That was the point of my original post.

On any event, getting back on track, the point is that my indefinitely-long-arguments were done back in good days when she was having infinite patience. But, like I said, during the two weeks when her patience were running out, I begtan to change as well. So there was a good reason for me NOT to be indefinitely long THIS time. Probably I would of been arguing for an hour or two. But this is nothing compared to the DAYS of arguing back in good days (something she was probably scared of).

However, indeed, it DID become a day since she was refusing to talk, so instead of talking for two hours I ended up cursing at her for the entire day trying to GET her to participate in the discussion.



Like I said, she haven't ACKNOWLEDGED the fact that she accepted what she needed to konw. Since I am not psychic, I have no way of knowing whether or not she believes me if she doesn't say it one way or the other. So the lack of response only made it sound like passive agression on her part. True, she "sort of" said that she beleived it few minutes later, but that was done just to get me off the back given that she hasn't said it right away.



She was totally attached to me since April untill the beginning of august. It only started to spiral down starting from the middle of august.



But she never indicated that she was uncertain about that. Quite the opposite, during the day after the daughter I have asked her 3 times that exact question on 3 separate occasions and she was responding that she wasn't thinking about breaking up at all.

That was part of a reason why i was yelling so much. If I knew that there were ANY danger at all of losing her, then I would of refrained from the whole argument since the little issue about a daughter isn't worth breaking up. But the point is that from my past experience I was assuming she won't break up with me no matter what. The only reason I asked her was to get simple reassurance, for no good reason.

Furthermore, few days BEFORE the issue with her daugher we were having arguments over other things, and back then I also asked her if she is breaking up with me. Her answer was that she "doesn't break up over an argument" and this was DESPITE the fact that she was totally mad at me.

So in light of a statement that she "doesn't break up over an argument", I was assuming that it is okay to start yet another argument. After all, if the incident with the daughter is the ONLY thing invovled, sure I might as well argue about it. On the other hand, if I knew it was at a price of breaking up, I would of stoped myself. So the whole point is that I haven't been warned ahead of time.



The way my mind works is that precisely THE FACT that I know that they are problems of my own making is what makes me mad at a woman. Lets put it this way.

Case A: The woman is a sole person to blame

Case B: The woman merely reacted to my behavior

In case of case A, most likely she is simply a bad person. If she is a bad person, she is bad towards EVERYONE, so there is no reason for me to take it personally. For example, a couple of years ago my ex-landlord was constantly taking advantage of me, but I was never mad at her at all.

On the other hand, in case B, surely I am to take it personally since the fact that my behavior caused her to react this way means that she wouldn't have done that towards everyone, and this singles out me as a "defensive side".

Now, speaking of case B, if I know it is my fault, why would I blame a woman? Well I guess the point is that I realize that some of the things, like saying hello to people, simply don't come naturally to me due to my Asperger. So, it almost feels like being judged for the fact that my eyes are brown.

Furthermore, given that I can't change the past, being judged for whatever I did in the past would ALWAYS imply being judged for something that is out of my control. Why? Well, what if I become a saint. Why should I still be accountable for doing my crime that now I feel sorry about?



No, not the first time ... Okay here is what happened. The first time we changed a subject of conversation. The second time I called her and she said "okay". Then AFTER she said okay I continued to pester her. So the THIRD time she acknowledged my explanation. And she only done it to get me off her back.



From my past experience, if she acknowledges something and I deny it, she will repeat her acknowledgement. So, it was my way of testing her sincerity. In fact, I was 70% sure she probably DID mean it when she acknowledge it. So the simple test was to deny it and hear her saying it again, and this would be the end of it. But she didn't repeat it again, so THEN I decided that may be it is because she didn't mean it.



I wish to be acknowledged when I am making LONG SPEECHES. On the other hand, her "acknowledgement" wasn't much longer than "that is fine" so it wasn't even an acknowledgement, just being polite.

I agree that this is probably what happends with me. After all they are obviously attracted to SOMETHING, so this something is the "good qualities" that are a reason for them to put up with my bad ones. However, that is probably one of the main things that mess me up. I can't draw a line just how much or how little would the other person put up with. What makes it difficult is that in a lot of cases it is a long period of unlimitted patience followed by rapid transition which I weren't prepared for. Erin is not the only example of such a thing. So in such cases I simply feel like part of a lotery or whatever.



It is funny because actually that is precisely what I was saying back in good days, and my intention was the opposite. The statement that I was lucky to have her was meant to be a compliment. I was saying that she is the only person in a planet who analyzes everything in such a great detail as I do, that it feels like she is another copy of me. And so I was lucky to have found her because with everyone else my overanalyzing would screw me over, but with her things are so great. So, according to what you just said, that last entence about the fact that she is the ONLY person with whom anything couls work, should have hurt her feelings. But anyway I don't think her feelings were hurt.

The context in which I was saying it to her was back at the time when I was overfocused on school due to the academic difficulties and thus was ignoring her. She kept pesterning me with emails where she was basically seeking attention with questions of whether or not I was "done with her" every time I won't write back for a couple of days because her emails are too long to read.

So thats why I thought that it was a good way of reassuring her. I mean, I was just done telling her that I wasn't responding becaosue of the length of an email in order for her NOT to worry about anything worse. But then she only started to worry more that she "made me mad" by writing at such a length. So, in order to reassure her that I am not mad, I had to explain to her that this was precisely a quality I liked about her.

Now, the above was referring to April -- June period. Now, the time period where she DID begin to perceive herself as a "last straw" was at July. I guess the switch have happened due to the fact that I finally reached some sort of solution about my academic situation and therefore was able to switch more focus on her. On the other hand, she have learned that writing me too much of long emails didn't work and thus her correspondence became a little bit less dence; but this distance made me uncomfortable since I was so used of getting unlimitted attention. So I guess this allowed her previous concern that I was "done with her" to "evlove" into a new concern that I do stick to her, but only because I haven't found anyone else.

I think the first thing that is to blame in time-wise order is the fact taht I started discussing with her the possibility of her moving from Ohio to Michigan and take classes online in order for me to save all the money I spent eating in restaurants since I haven't found a financial support for the comming semester. Again, this was not an issue for me back at the time when I was worried of being kicked out from school altogether (which was the issue that simply distracted me from responding to Erin's emails). But in the summer when it became clear that I am staying in school for good, I began thinking further in terms of financial situation.

The interesting thing, however, is that the moment I suggested that she moves, she immediately went online to see whether or not there are online classes taht she can take while away, and likewise she immediately began to search for housing in my location. At the same time, she expressed her concern that may be I don't like her since it seems that I need her for a different reason.

The reason she acted this way is because after a sudden death of her father, she was obsessed with an idea of people whom she is close to disappearing, which, in case of men, would be issues such as lack of sincere love. Now, due to having been aware of this problem, whenever she expressed her lack of trust of me, she would also add a statement that she doesn't trust anyone, so I shouldn't be taking it personally. Motivated by this understanding, she would give me unlimitted time to explain myself and she will always end up agreeing with my explanations and simply saying that the only reason for her original doubts is her own psychological problems.

She would also be saying that due to her Asperger she is unaware of what the expectations are in general, so she is trying to agree with whatever I am saying. Upon my questioning she told me that the reason why she was so eager to look for ways to move as soon as I asked her to -- because she simply doesn't know when it is appropriate or inappropriate to refuse.

By the way, speaking of her willingness to acknowledge her condition, I remember one phone conversation that was quite interesting. Basically, I went through my own period of depression due to school and everything. So I called her in order to seek her emotional support. So, since I was telling her about all of my frustrations, I was also asking her about her concerns related to the way her condition would affect relationship. She was actually patiently listening for me and responding to anything and everything I was bringing up, in whatever way I was bringing it up. She simply answered my question that she can't give me too much reassurance since due to her bipolar she won't ever be fully functioning adult, but she believes in living day by day and praying for God's help.

I guess I was looking for company at the moment and due to her Asperger she weren't sure what to say, but she was willing to be there for me for like 3 hours in the middle of a night. When I asked her whether anything I said hurt her feelings, she merely acknowledged that it wasn't the most wonderful thing to hear that "my life is miserable and having you around makes it tolerable". But she said it in a very calm way and when I apologised she said it was okay, and was willing ot listen to me for another hour or two.

The bottom line to all this is that her approach is very PASSIVE. She would merely ACKNOWLEDGE if something is wrong if I ask her. And then if I apologise, she would say it is okay. Moving forward, when it did get to the point when I was openly yelling at her, up untill the middle of august, the very worst I could get out of her was a mere acknowledgement that "she feels hated" due to the yelling. So, the fact that she uses a passive form "hate-ED" instead of referring to me, implies that she is a kind of pet like a cat, who would feel "hated" if I do something mean to it, and the next moment would forget about it if I come back to a cat and treat it nicely. For the same reason Erin was telling me it was okay each time I apopogised because, being like a cat, she doesn't have a capacity to be mad at something for extended periods of time.

In many settings she admitted that she lives at the moment. When i was seeking her reassurance about her being disabled and our future, she was saying that she lives at the moment day by day. When I was talkign about her moving, she was again saying that it is hard for her to plan things ahead because she lives in the moment. This also explains her lack of capacity of developing anger towards me. Because I remember after one of the first times I was yelling at her, I was apologising and she was saying it was okay. When I was asking her wehther she was sure it was okay, she said that she was. She added that if I were yelling in front of her she might have reacted differently because I would of been an "open threat", but since I yelled over the phone it was okay.

Even the way she was talking about other things too was alone these passive lines. For example, she was saying that her sister ended contact with her for many years, but now she started talking to her again and invited her to her wedding, so "that is good". Now you see how she hasn't said anything other than "that is good". Much like a cat would merely react to the immediate thing being done to it.

So I guess I basically decided that she was a cat, and this means that I might AS WELL be mean to her. After all, I can be mean to a cat, and the cat won't remember it the next day, especially if I pet it to make it curl up. Likewise, I can first be mean to Erin and she will feel hated (much like a cat will run away) and then I will apologise to her (much like petting a cat) and she will say that it is okay (much like any cat will curl up if I pet it, even if I was the one who was mis-treating it in the past).

So basically, it worked up untill mid-august, but after that all of a sudden she stopped being a cat and started holding things against me. She was also drawing some general conclusions like me being a "manipulator" or always "wanting to be right" etc. So obviously cats aren't capable of this type of thinking and that is why I havne't anticipated it and was greatly shocked when this occured. For the same reason I never expected her to break up with me since cats can ran away when scared but they won't remember it long enough to change their plans. So, basically, I just feel that if I knew it ahead of time I would of acted differently.

As far as what happened at the end of august, she did bring up issues related to my not caring for her. Her main arguments were:

1)The fact taht I might need her in order to save money

2)The fact that I have been discussing Anne on this message board (PLEASE NOTE: she first saw it in June, which lead to few questions that were resolved, and she was okay with it untill august)

3)The fact that I brought up a movie "just friends" which suggested that I wanted to be "just friends" with her -- ALTHOUGH THIS WAS WRONG; I WAS SIMPLY DWELLING ON MY OBSESSION (see http://www.wrongplanet.net/asperger.htm ... highlight= for more detailes)

4)The fact that I always yell at her which means I might not like her

5)The fact that I haven't been expressing physical affection towards her -- EVEN THOUGH I EXPLAINED TO HER THAT THIS IS BECAUSE I AM TOO SCARED TO MAKE A FIRST MOVE SO I WAS WAITING FOR HER TO MAKE ONE

6)It was perfectly fine with her that I keep her from my mom since she has similar problems in terms of having overprotective mom. HOWEVER when she read a post on this message board where I raised a question of SOMEONE ELSE thinking that it might imply shame (see this post http://www.wrongplanet.net/asperger.htm ... highlight= ) , she decided that may be she should be thinking the same thing. After all, if I talk about it (even if it is about analyzing someone else's thoughts) it has to be true.

7)The fact taht I am looking for an additional advisor to help me with my Ph.d. project and one of the possibilities I told her about is in New Mexico which is too far away from her. So she decided that she is "unimportant" since I still considered that option DESPITE the distance from her

When I was trying to adress part 7, I told her that "suppose I had any other girl" in this case "I would still be putting my career as number 1". The intention of this argument was to say that she isn't any worse than any other girl. However, she said taht she haven't thought of that, but now that I brought it up, she does suspect that perhaps I would of acted differently if I had someone else (in other words 180 degrees opposite to intended meaning of a sentence)

9)BACK IN JULY, during one of her visits when I was trying to study while in the same hotel room with her, I ended up going back home in orer to pick up more textbooks to look something up. Since I didn't want my roomates to see her since they know my mom and I keep her from my mom, I asked her to stay at a caffee. Then when i went home to look for more books I spent more time than expected. So she decided I was avoiding her.

10)Again back in July, when she went to macdonald's to buy tea I ran away from the hotel room we were staying at in order to call my mom without giving her any warnings ahead of time.



Probably that is it



No, that is because she found a different boyfriend. In fact that was the original "reason" for a break up, so this borders on cheating. However, I was pushing her to break up with her new boyfriend in order to come back together with me, but nothing could change her mind. She simply started to make up reasons that I KNEW were not true. For instance, she said that she was looking for sex and I don't believe in sex before marriage. I know it is a lie because when I told her how I don't believe in sex before marriage, she said she doesn't either because she is a Christian. So when I confronted her with that previous statement, she answered that she is "moaning for it". But this is highly unlikely given that she committed to not having sex FEW YEARS ago, and she started to "moan for it" EXACTLY when she had to break up with me, which is too much of a coincidence. Another issue she brought up is the fact that I don't take a shower. Again, it is a lie. Because the last time she seen me I have apologised for not taking shower and she kept telling me that I werne't dirty -- and yes she was honest this time since indeed she did tell it to me in her usual lengthy fashion. So why did she said that shower is the reason? Simple. Because she heard ME thinking it is a problem, so in order to avoid talking about the real issue she better bring up something else with which I would agree.

Finally, however, she did bring up a real thing. She said that the reason for breakup is that I am never listening to her and constantly push my point, and here I am doing it again. Well, THAT part was true, but what were I supposed to do now that it is too late? Another REAL reason for a breakup is that she thinks I am not attracted to her since I never touched her. But the reason for that is that I was waiting for HER to make a first move. But when I explain this line of reasoning she won't follow it through. I would say that YES I DO want to touch her, but since I don't know if she wants me to, thats why I don't. If I knew she wanted me to, then I would of. But she responds that she doesn't want me to touch her JUST because I think she wants me to. But it isn't it. I DO want to touch her, I am just scared of takign risk. When she finally heard it she said it taht she is scared of taking risks too, and thats why we aren't a good mathc. Then I told her that NOW it isn't going ot be a risk since NOW I know she watned me to touch her since she even broke up with me over it. However, she simply hanged up a phone.


But the point is that I DO want to change. So the above paragraph really discourages me because it implies that I can't ever change for the rest of my life.



But Erin is the ONLY one with whom I was abusive and I couldn't predict of being that way before I met her. The point is that I change from setting to setting and the other ppl don't get it. So they judge me by a particular setting and think I am always that way.

Also I have heard that it is common among children with Asperger to have temper tantrums. I am A LOT younger than my age and I am like a little kid when it comes to seeking aproval. So given that I am really a kid and kids with Asperger have tantrums, this makes it part of Asperger.

Last edited by Roman on 08 Sep 2006, 6:41 am, edited 3 times in total.

Assorted random comments

I much prefered pure mathematics to physics or applied maths because I found that in physics - formulas tended to be approximated instead of taken to some infinite dimension - whereby in pure maths, they'd drop out into some nice elegant forumla. The physics and applied formulas could never do this as they'd left half the stuff out. I sometimes wonder if these approximations then cause faults in engineering (exploding space shuttles) and other calculations - even though I know that when it comes to practical application of any theory we are limited by the accuracy of our measuring instruments. But I'm crap at measuring too. Every time I measure something I get a different answer.

If your ex wants analysis - let her lead it. I do acknowledge it is very annoying when a person never states their own opinion on anything for fear of rejection or disagreement or something.

I guess if you want to be friends with this kind of person and you want them to have an opinion and feel safe expressing it - then you need to welcome and encourage any opinion they might volunteer - even if you think it is inadequate or wrong or flawed or you have a better idea. If every time, they express an opinion or idea of their own they get punished for it with a barrage of "superior" logic - they're going to stop telling you what they think about anything. Even the weather. I don't know how it was for your ex. I do know it is really difficult to get these kinds of people to open up. Perhaps because I am about as subtle as a bulldozer.

Consider it might be good practice to always greet someone who comes into your space - even by waving in a space where talking would be inappropriate like a lecture theatre during a lecture.

The Macbeth ref - I explained enough of it to be relevant. Essentially (here I go again) the character "Lady MacBeth" pushed her point very hard to hide her crime. Politicians do this a lot. That's the thing about Shakespeare - he captured human character very neatly in his plays and sometimes I think nothing much has changed since he wrote them. You might need a translator for Shakespeare's English - it has a very old structure. This kind of translation problem sometimes foils/frustrates aspies. Was Hamlet an aspie?

Detail, priorities: I think for some of us aspies that like to nut out all the details to the point we get distracted by them, like delving deeper and deeper into a fractal image, we have to set limits and priorities. Let people help with this. Otherwise you are lost to it forever. I find piggy backing with this, is being overwhelmed by the scope of the detail (which I should probably prune back), and procrastinating because I can't get it perfect enough to satisfy myself - again often related to the depth of detail I am aware of but don't have time to explore fully. I don't have infinite amounts of time to spend on infinite layers of detail.

If you want your relationships to be rigorously logical - better stick to computers. If you insist on logic, you will never get it when someone changes their mind on a whim. Let alone when they do it based on a stack of childhood illusions so embarrasing or unconscious they can't tell you about them, or just a flip flop in their brain chemistry.

Sometimes a sense of relationship unease doesn't have a logical explanation - or one has to start with the fuzzy illogical stuff before one can get to something more specific or tangible. Yes there was probably a lot more to the whole relationship problem you had than just the fact that you didn't say hello to the daughter.

This might be hard for the ex to figure out herself - if she believes she should be logical and have sensible reasons for her actions too. I don't know much about bipolar - but I do know everyone I met that has it, makes no sense to me most of the time. I never have a clue what I might do that might upset them or what they will do next, sometimes I think I did something upsetting and spend ages trying to figure it out, but most of the time they just get upset, no rational reason - it's part of the cycle.

I have found out for myself - especially as I have only recently begun to understand how Aspergers affects my thinking - that some of the perfectly logical reasons that I had come up with for why I do what I do - were completely flawed. Flawed at the axiom and premise level. Even you have admitted to building great piles of reasoning on flawed logic. Consider going with the flow instead of analysing the flaws to death - because you might just be replacing one set of flawed thinking with another set of flawed thinking.

I think in relationships - the balances are constantly changing - the minute you try to nail it all down with rigid inflexible laws you put the whole thing out of balance. However each new relationship - offers learning and growth opportunities - even if you think it ends up one huge mistake - it never is completely.

Oh and cats, dogs, even fish - do remember things especially traumatic things for a lot longer than one day. You can't be mean to a cat and expect it to forget by the next day.

About the temper tantrums - sometimes I get them when I'm extremely frustrated - and that's the last time you should get that mad - because being frustrated means - that you can't do anything about the problem - so why bother getting mad. It messes with my head thinking about it. It might be part of Aspergers but I think we can still learn to manage it.

http://www.tonyattwood.com.au/

Consider investing in the red book on the front page "Exploring feelings, CBT to manage Anger". Look for a strategy that works for you...

I guess in my case, the whole issue of approximation when it comes to numerical measurements, didn't really bother me. Mainly because my interests are theoretical. So, on a theory level, the equations of classical physics are neat, and so I got throught that level easilly.

The real challange begins when it comes to the quantum mechanics because that is where we are talking about things we never seen with our eyes and since all of our intuition is based on what we have seen, the quantum mechanics is extremely counterintuitive. Like particle can become wave and then again localize into particle, etc.

However, I passed through undergraduate quantum okay as well. WHat allowed me to survie it is the fact that we devoted two weeks of lectures on these paradoxes. So, while of course no one knows satisfactory answers, one thing I leanred was that I was SUPPOSED to be confused, so it wasn't about my missing any info.

On the other hand, once I got to graduate level courses, they never spent similar two weeks discussing other stuff. So THAT was where I actually believed I was missing something and it took few years of independant thinking before I realized taht whatever I was missing was logical equivalent to the problems discussed in undergraduate level.

Part of what contributed to the whole situation is that I wasn't too wise in picking classes and I ended up feeling I took something too easy and decided to "undo" my mistake by jumping a year ahead. Since it was year long course, I basically through a baby with a water since while I was trying to jump over spring semester of the first year I ended up also jumping over fall of the second year. So taht was where all trhe confusion started.

So I am not sure how much of it this issue and how much of it is the need for rigor. I believe it is a little bit of both, since everyone were telling me I better be a mathematician.

It is funny though. Because the reason I choose physics over math is precisely BECAUSE I know physics has all these counterintuitive issues so I wanted to "rewrite" it. This was my goal since I was 9 year old. Of course as I got older I weren't nearly as ambitious. But then when I felt confused in these graduate courses I ended up rewriting it anyway, just for a different reason.

So now that I look back, I am thinking of publishing of some of my re-writing, which might well be few almost finished pieces of work and hopefully make all the wasted time into something. But as far as my department is concerned I screwed up my reputation in a research group I am interested in. So I was forced to find someone who knows nothing about the subject to be my official supervisor. So now we are looking for ppl at other universities to help him do his job.

This might be good and bad. Good because I find ppl who work very close to interpreational issues I am interested at. There are only very few ppl who do it, and none of them are here in Michigan. And it is bad because no one likes to have finished 5 years of graduate school and not have my ph.d. topic yet.



I won't be having any contact with her unless she changes her mind and decides to be in a relatinship again. I find the whole thing of being freinds with someone who dumped me quite humiliating. The whole point of the discussion is

a)What SHOULD I have done in the past

b)Is there any way to get her to change her mind

If the answer to part b is no, then I don't wnat to be friends with her either.





I know it is getting off track, but I am trying to contemplate whehter or not the word "punished" can be a way to guide my future thinking. Could the whole dating thing be reward/punishment? On the one hand, it explains why nice guys can't do it, namely because the positive behavior is guaranteed and thus it is no longer a reward. On the other hand, it explains why being self-centered doesn't help either, namely the self-centered behavior "punishes" the other person for sticking around.

I have to add that I am NOT trying to come to conclusion that I should manipulate ppl. QUite the opposite, since this is what I was accused of doing, I want to learn some strategies NOT to do it. I guess the purpose of above paragraph is just to find some way of replacing all this convoluted reasoning in original post with something much simpler, since like you said overanalyzing can't help.

I also found another way of making things simpler for myself. I remember how back in high school when I was taking college level math and physics classes I was constantly getting into trouble for asking too many questions. I never questioned why I got into trouble. On the other hand, right now I am getting into trouble for the exact same thing, yet I am confused. I guess may be what compounds it is that right now the issue of getting ppl irritated, itself, became an obsession that drives the questions. So, by getting irritated for my questions, they only make me question it more. On the other hand, in the past the obsession that was driving me was math, so the fact that questions drove ppl crazy was taken for granted.

So wow, what a great a time was it back in high school. It is refreshing to thikn of myself now in these terms. So perhaps I shouldn't be any more mad at my ex-s then I was mad at my teachers back then ...

You see, my questoins back in high school were all correct. I did no bad math. The problem was the fact that they were disruptive. Same thing now ... may be my "logic" IS coorect. But ... it is disruptive. The women don't like too many quetions just like professors didn't. That simple, LOL

Anyway, I guess getting back on track I am trying to invent some images to help myself out. So far I thought of two of them:

1)reward/punishment that influences behavior of the women
2)my behavior in high school verses my behavior now
3)All arguments are based on axioms and there are many sides to the same coin



But you see, if there are flip flops in brain chemistry, how can I predict that the relatinoship would last? I mean with all of my ex-s everytyhing looked VERY good for quite a while untill a flip flop that happened very fast. So how can I know such won't happen in future?



But the point is taht I don't know how to go with a flow. Inability to go wiht a flow is a core of Asperger.

The only trick I was able to think of was to disract myself to school. In fact it worked in terms of killing my obsessions, but that caused the opposite problem -- it made Erin feel she was ignored and probably was the main factor that lead to breakup.

Besides, what the experience with Erin just proved to me is that yes I can successfully not pay attention for many months, but THE MOMENT she does something differently, such as contacts me fewer times or brings something up on which I don't agree with her, then she is a topic of my obsessions all over again. So this is what leads me to think that disracting myself is not the answer. The answer is to change my view on things and that way I will act differently, regardless of what my focus of attention is.

Reward/punishment influences everyone.

However in a relationship - or a philosophical discussion - if you want equal participation you have to let the other person have an opinion different to your own.

If you feel it is an illogical opinion and that bothers you - I find the best approach for me - is not to hammer away with my own logic, but instead to ask questions that will lead to any flaws being exposed for example "what about this idea - how does that fit in". Bear in mind that "this idea" might be infinitely unlikely and hardly worth using to destroy someone else's opinion that applies (logically or not) quite well in all likely scenarios.

There is always a path sideways/between/parallel/alternate to "reward" and "punishment". You might want to investigate Edward De Bono's work for ideas here. http://www.edwdebono.com/

How can you know that the relationship will last? You can't. Isn't that fun?

You need to be able to tolerate uncertainty and ambiguity. I believe with someone who has bipolar - you can be very sure for every flip flop one way - with in a week or so - there will be a flip flop the other way. You won't know what day it will come but it will. They can take drugs to flatten it all out, but that also takes a lot of the excitement and enthusiasm out of the highs.

The way I relate to bi-polar people is to pretend the nasty outbursts that I couldn't handle or make sense of - didn't happen. They usually seem fine with that and don't want to analyse the hell out of it in some futile attempt to stop it from happening sometime in the future. None of my close friends are bi-polar - I just can't handle the flipflops well enough. They scare me too much.

In some ways - I think your ex-1 was very good for you and in other ways not suitable for a close relationship. I have to agree with you, it is hard to be friends with someone after you have been dumped (or done the dumping). Hopefully though, you have learned much and will make a better choice next time.

But I'll repeat - relationships are not predictable. I don't think you can be sure about anything - and the minute you are sure, she will likely think you are taking her for granted and get upset and you won't understand why. I don't think you can figure out the relationship or the person completely and then be able to relate in a constant unchanging way - unless by this it means that you continually learn new things about your relationship and new ways to make your partner feel wanted and nurtured and loved (and they do the same for you).

I don't know that "Aspergers" by itself is an excuse to be rigid and unchanging in a relationship. I don't have much to go on here, except that I think both my parents had Aspergers to some degree, and they were constantly learning about their relationship and relationships in general in order to keep it together.

Damn - I meant for that to be a short post.

Last edited by wobbegong on 11 Sep 2006, 3:46 am, edited 2 times in total.