What do Aspies need from relationships?

Post Reply New Topic

Someone who accepts me for who I am would be my priority. I like a women whom can hold up a good intellectual conversation,Someone who shows me affection and say affectionate things.I want to know that she will be by me what ever happens and she will not just disspear the next day so I like a certain amount of loving reassurance.

Thanks for the happies! Can never have too many of those.

But don't sweat it, I'm not bitter except for a few seconds here and there, when dudes have been harassing me again. The rest of the time it's more cheerful snark.

Hmmm, I could see though where I might *sound* bitter when pointing out certain realities, since those realities are in and of themselves bitter.

I need affection. A friend. An activities partner. Someone to talk to, and the other way around: someone I can help when her day sucks. And sex. Sex is good, but it isn't the most important thing.

I would say:
Someone who is accepting of YOU and willing to compromise when you don't understand something
Someone who is willing to verbalise things instead of having you just "Know" them, taht's always annoying. like if they're angry or upset, and why they are.
someone who gets that you need more alone time than others, and that just because you do doesn't mean that you're annoyed with them.
Someone who will listen to you about the touching thing because if you're uncomfortable that it will do all sorts of damage later.
someone who will not be angery if you cannot understand what they want from you and must explain the "What, Where, when, why, and how"
Someone that can better you by being patient with the things that make us Aspie.
Someone whowill listen when you need to talk, and who doesn't mind if you ask them questions while they "need to talk"
Someone who makes you feel good about being you.

HUGS!
~Eilidh

I have been in that situation before--it really sucks.

(hugs back)

-Someone who understands, but does not feel sympathetic to the point of babying me.
-Understands the fact that I will ALWAYS try to be the gentleman when doing things.
-Doesn't act histrionic (I got a mother who's like that, lol)
-Isn't stuck in that immature freshman girl mindset of drinking excessively and banging every goatee'd, backwards hat-wearing frat-boy-douchebag.
-Accepts that I will at times begin to "get lost in my own mind"
-Someone who is smart and witty.
-Someone who accepts that even though I try to make the first move/initiative towards anything intimate, that I can't always be the one to do it.

Who's dumping whom?

I met a STEM woman at a conference, and somehow things just didn't click even though my background is science. It felt like she was questioning to get at something else other than what I was actually doing for the last 5 years. The questions she was asking made me feel like I would have to be in competition with her for status and job titles, without giving a rat about actual interests, and I'm sure my response must have sounded rude. I apologized, but then I realized that a scientist is not specifically what I am looking for. I still could be with a scientist, but it isn't something I specifically require.

Science is work for me now. I still like it, and as far as work goes, it pays good return for the effort, but it makes poor conversation material in part because it brings back certain problems in my mannerisms, like talking too loud. Other interests are needed.

Those who don't like double standards are dumping those who try to demand double standards.



I've heard endless anecdotes about this kind of interaction from both sides.

The women generally describe two scenarios, which can overlap with each other:

1. Having an ordinary conversation between colleagues about what each other's work is, same as male colleagues do all the time, and the guy got all huffy for some reason.

2. A guy tries to chat her up, and rather than endure his painfully awkward and tiresome attempts at small talk and painfully awkward and tiresome pauses, she tries to get a conversation going about something actually interesting, and tries to use the guy's work as a starting point. Rather than helping smooth the conversation along and find something mutually enjoyable to talk about, he gets huffy and defensive.

In both cases, women come away with the impression that the guys in question are willing to monologue to an admiring female audience about their work, but find ordinary conversation about their work bizarrely threatening.

From the guys I hear:

1. It upsets me to think I'm a woman I'm attracted to could compete with me professionally. (I have no idea what that's even about, and neither do the other women I talk to.)

2. I want to talk about other stuff. (This is fine if you can converse interestingly about other stuff. If you can't, it's pretty obnoxious when the person you approach tries to help you out with getting conversation going and you get huffy about the topic they choose.)

3. I approach women for emotional support, not for discussion as equals, and when they talk about my work as one equal to another it upsets me and I feel threatened. (Neither I nor any of the women I've talked to have anything to say to this other than "you might want to check what century you're in".)

If you meet someone, male or female, at a conference, and you don't want to talk about your work, it's going to seem profoundly odd unless you have a whole lot of really entertaining conversation on other topics ready to roll off your tongue.

Hello CerebralDreamer,

In my experience, the lists below will tell you what to look for and what to avoid in a partner. Unfortunately, what you may find, as I have, is that the things you want to avoid seem to crop up after you have started seeing them, but then in cases like that, if you can't tolerate it, dump them. Some of the stuff below may be a repetition of what others have already said but here goes:



Someone who will wholly accept you for who you are. I think this is by far the most important thing to look for in a person because, even though you may have disagreements (most people do), they will value you for the person you are. In other words, the personal trait you are looking for here is respect.
Loyalty - in the sense that you know that person will always be there for you no matter what life throws at you.
Understanding - someone who is willing to try and understand you, even though they can't necessarily relate to you. Even if they don't understand you at the end of it, yet they still stick around, this is a person that is worth it.
Someone who will be able to satisfy whatever your emotional, romantic and sexual needs are, provided that it is within their scope as well and you are not too clingy (this puts people off). And by sexual needs, I mean appetite, how you choose to enact that is entirely up to you
You will both having niggling little flaws that may irritate each other - if you can both live with them or sometimes laugh about them then you are on the way to being for keeps.
Someone who can communicate with you - it helps given as we are not always the best in the world at communicating ourselves . A relationship where neither of you can communicate properly usually fails, although, having said that, I wouldn't mind a point of view from an aspie-aspie relationship, I am guessing there is more in the way of understanding here?



Someone who feels the need to reference their ex partner on a regular basis, this means they still have feelings for them and that you are essentially sharing this person with said ex. It can also mean that you are a mere commodity to them until they believe they can find something better or make their ex sufficiently jealous so that they will come running back..... (I haven't been here before have I? Noooo....)
Someone who feels that they are superior to you because of their gender, job status, race etc e.g. when a man has to point out that men are better at this that and the other than women all the bloody time (sorry personal rant here) or when your partner can't accept it if you get a good career and he/she doesn't. This means they see you as a lesser person as opposed to an equal (double standards).
Someone who feels the need to point out to you that you are not necessarily their type or that they have 'settled' with you because they originally wanted someone else, someone prettier/handsome etc. This means they don't wholly love you and never will, meaning there is a danger that, once someone more their type turns up, they will cheat on you and/or drop you like a sack of manure.
Someone who seems to be at their happiest when you spend money on them, to me this is a little bit, if not a lot, suspect, unless this is something you don't mind....
Someone who is unable to compromise and expects to have their way all the time - nip this in the bud or just get rid of them otherwise you will be their lap dog for life!

This is all I can really think of right now, if I think of any more, I'll add them on.

I would have enjoyed talking about my work with her. The problem was that she seemed to want to know where the direction of my employment was going, and I wasn't prepared to talk about that. She may have been negatively judging my lack of preparation to talk about that, and she was obviously poorly prepared to understand the actual details of what I did, which is what I came prepared to talk about. I think a lot of women get into trouble when they want to know indicators of how much money the guy is likely to earn, while not knowing or caring to know where his interests are or what he actually did.

I can foresee resentment on the horizon if I were paired with someone who only cares about keeping the paychecks rolling in, and doesn't give a damn about sharing the interest and motivation behind what I do.

Sure, she was hot, but...

This is absolutely 100% true for me. Or at least, if you substitute "professionally" with "at what I'm best at".

This is NOT (for me at least) a question of earning power, status, etc. It would not upset me one bit if a woman is very capable in some other human endeavor, professional or not. In fact, I would be very much attracted if she was.

This all comes down to having a "turf" or "territory" so to speak. Most of us guys have a deep psychological need to feel that there is an area in life where we can "rule" so to speak, where we can feel above all others we know. This is especially true for aspie guys, who often have exceptional abilities in one area of special interest, but are weak in all others. This is probably a combination of nature and nurture. But in any case, it is one of the deepest emotional needs.

People who seem within reach of outdoing us in our area of maximum capability and pride, whether that is a career, hobby, whatever, are a threat to our confidence. And I repeat, this does not relate to overall strength, but just in our area of greatest talent. To put it in perspective, this does not only apply to females, this applies to a lesser degree to our relationships with other men as well. It is just more comfortable to be around people who complement yourself rather than try to "steal your glory". And while it is sometimes fun to compete, this is not the kind of interaction we look to in order to feel strong and powerful. And that's what romantic attraction is to many of us, the chance to mutually look up to each others strongest qualities. It blows me away if highly capable women do NOT feel like this, as it just seems like human nature.

Of course there are people, men and women alike, who are more cooperative, whose highest aspiration is simply to do good for the world, and could care less if someone else accomplishes first what they were trying to accomplish. And maybe this is also the flip side of women's sexual choosiness, in the sense that in exchange for not making a name for themselves by being ahead in their intellectual or professional accomplishments, they seek to be ahead by monopolizing the best quality mate.

Oh, and let me add that many women don't help this issue at all, by expecting us to "woo" them and project an air of hyperconfidence. If you're on a par with us in terms of our strongest qualities, how do you expect us to do that?

Ok, that's definitely a bit obnoxious on her part, unless she asked the questions with a lot of "if you don't mind my asking" and other indicators of it being fine for you not to answer.

Keep in mind, you said she was a STEM field person, and just like other STEM field people, the probability is pretty significant that she was an Aspie. Most likely she was hoping for any insights or information she could use in trying to figure out her own employment future, and went about it gracelessly.

It could be she was trying to judge your monetary potential, but women actually do this far, far less than men claim they do, and someone with her own STEM career has little reason to care about the state of your bankbook.

This is baffling to me. Why force your confidence to hang on something so easily broken? There's always going to be someone better than you at your one thing. And the need to feel "above all others we know", even if it is about just one thing, sounds pretty sad to me.




That's just it -- there's nothing inherently competitive about a conversation between equals. That's part of what I was getting at in my remarks -- to the women I've heard from about this and to me, it's absolutely baffling to make a conversation about something we both enjoy into some stupid competition where your ego is on the line.

Plus, if you never seek out those who are at least your equals if not better than you at your best thing, you're going to stagnate and eventually deteriorate at that very thing. No one can be their best in a vacuum when it comes to STEM stuff.



Sure women feel that part of it, just not the competitive part, which can seem, well, petty.



I can't seem to follow where you were going with that paragraph.



Hyperconfidence is a huge turnoff, actually. And it seems utterly senseless that you can only feel confident if you think you're better than someone.

I have to agree. biostructure, there really are a lot of women who find this sort of thing an enormous turnoff.

i have had the most success and compatibility with women who are colleagues in my profession meaning similarly educated in the same field.

i began a long distance relationship with a woman i met on fitness-singles.com. we had a phone/email/web-cam relationship for almost one year and we finally met a few weeks ago. we got along very well before we met and even better when we met in person. the only surprises were good one in that she was even better in person. she was honest about herself in every way. we communicated so much for so long before we met we did really know each other pretty well.

we expect she will soon be offered a job about 150 miles from where i presently live. if our relationship continues growing as it has been, and i think it will, i would be willing to move 150 miles north to be with her.

she and i both have master's degrees in technical fields from highly regarded technical institutes. we are both intellectually gifted. we understand each other at a very fundamental or personal level, kind of that know what each other are thinking thing. i believe she is an aspie though she may not know it nor would i ever suggest it to her knowing how she thinks of people and her philosophy on life. politically, she is a libertarian though she is unaware of that specific political party (she is a russian immigrant but has been in the US over 20 years now) and i am a conservative so we have interesting discussions about politics and society.

i think her and i both being aspies actually helps and with me knowing she is an aspie without her knowing she is so actually helps me relate to her better as i understand many of her needs very well and can respond to those needs appropriately which makes her feel loved all the more.

that's what is working for me presently.

Well, it's just the way it is for some of us. And it's not true that there is always going to be someone better at anything. Well, it's probably more true the more well-rounded one is, but us aspies are not known to be well-rounded, but for being way better at one thing than another.



It is inherently competitive, if either or both have confidence invested in being better at that thing.



Not necessarily, in the sense that people can become experts at different approaches to a problem.



Well the need to be constantly given gifts and be told you're special and loved can seem petty to us. Yes, we like you, get over it.



It's not that it is only possible to feel confident if you are better, it's just that there's a sense of security and thrill associated with it.

I think this is a fundamental issue with how boys and girls are raised, helped by natural tendencies but in no way absolutely determined by them.

Us guys grow up with the idea that to feel masculine is to feel like we are almost superhumanly capable at something. We are not given the tools to be strong while still one of the crowd, especially us aspies, as the less you can rely on being a supreme authority on something, the more you have to rely on people skills. Women, on the other hand, are raised to be cooperative, to be happy working together and to take pride in others' accomplishments. And so even female aspies may tend not to feel the need to dominate like male aspies, though they will have more emotional stresses. And I suspect this accounts for their more feminine relationship attitudes, despite their more male brains.

So, men feel entitled to strive to outdo others, even outdo themselves. But we're not prepared to be strong in other, more communal ways. Just tower over others and you will be taken care of by them, is what is ingrained in us. So then, our deepest insecurity is that we will be totally equal, that we will not stand out at anything. Women, on the other hand, usually seem very prepared to accept that they won't be the best at anything. But instead, they inherit a plethora of other, incredibly annoying insecurities--fear of being unworthy of love, fear of being used and objectified, needing to be protected, etc.

So really, the way out is to give both men and women the strength to fill both roles, of the follower and the leader, the supporter and the supported, the nurturer and the nurtured. But something tells me there will still be an instability here that leads to a split (a bifurcation if you will, for all you people who understand what that means). There will be one group of people who strive for the top, who seek their own personal mountains to stand on top of. The others will take pride in being their support system, and will value caring and loyalty. Someday this may not be split down gender lines, but I really can't see it going away.

Sometimes I wish I could be totally secure without having to find a niche where I'm the best, since the STEM fields are becoming more and more cooperative. But that would require both a lot of mental "reprogramming" on my part, and also women yielding some power in the interpersonal sphere, and helping me grow there.