Can someone define shame for me?

Post Reply New Topic

But the question still remains, how come the fact that *I* am a "Lowly Peasant" would imply that *she* doesn't want to be with me. You see, who *I* am doesn't affect her, it only affects me. So why would she care? The only reason why she would, is if her deal is to decide whom to "give credit".



But if it were only FEW people, then how come do I CONSTANTLY hear about jerks doing better than nice guys.

On the other hand, if we do decide to pay attention to the few ppl who need professional help, then how come we don't have few other women who need a different kind of professional help and would go for a nice guy? Okay fine, my current girlfriend (NOT Anne) as well as my two ex-s obviously did go for a nice guy. But this brings me right back to the first sentence, namely that we are ignoring "few". And if we do ignore few, it would no longer be consistant to pay attention to the "few" women who go for jerks.

Bottom line: whether or not they need professional help, how come there are MORE women who go for jerks then there are women who go for nice guys?



I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I DO understand that strangers aren't in a relatinship and the whole business about cheating. My purpose of bringing it up was to illustrate the problem with your definition of relationship. In the previous responses you have stated that relatinoship is about feelings. So, I have shown you why "relationship=feelings" wouldn't work. On the one hand, this won't work because it would imply that strangers who are attracted to each other are in a relationship. On the other hand it won't work because, due to the fact taht you can't DECIDE what to feel and what not to feel, you will be constantly cheating on your partner by being attracted to other people. Of course, I know that merely being attracted without acting on it is NOT cheating. But the point is that in order to make that last sentence you have to realize that feeling something and being in a relationship is not the same thing. So, this example proves wrong your point that relatinoship is the same as feeling.



Okay I see your point. BUt you have to admit that you need to have a little of philosophical background to see it. In other words, failure to realize it is NOT a deliberate lying. So, I am still confused as to why one of my ex-s took for granted a bunch of psychological statements such as "I can't be happy with a relationship and keep it from my mom at the same time" and she acted totally defensive about it, while I was confused as to why such psychological theory would be true on the first place. The thing is that she didn't even bother explain it to me -- she took it for granted that I know perfectly well that I am ashamed and was mad at me about it. So are you saying that other people are all very good philosophers and psychologists that they can ALL take these things for granted, let alone the question of whether or not some psychological theories would really apply to EVERYONE? I guess this goes back to the original question stated in the poll. How would you personall answer that poll? Just curious.





But the point is that one of the girls that rejected me told me straight up that I can't love someone unless I love myself. So, since she was verbalizing her thoughts, I am fairly confident that she was NOT thinking about my having problem maintaining relationships. Rather, she was strictly worrying about teh fact that I am not happy. She also said that I CAN"T love someone untill I love myself. So, she wasn't talking about the girls I am with -- she was strictly talking about *me* not being able to fall in love. So, the quesiton is, how would lack of happiness prevent me from falling in love? To me it seems backwards, because when I am un-happy I get attached to people more easilly.



I don't want a support from my mother because she is very overprotective, so I don't want her to be even more overprotective. I am trying to keep things FROM her, especially the fact that I need emotional support. As far as she knows I am very happy about being a graduate student and I don't need anything else in life, so there is no reason for me to be upset about not having a girlfriend, or about anything else of this nature.



But the "problems" that I have are about feeling rejected. So, from pure logical perspective, the only way to adress teh problem of being rejected is to meet new ppl.



My environment = school + my family + women.

You are saying that women is NOT it. So, I guess I am left with school and family. As for school, I don't see how it would dirrectly affect my relationships. As for family, yes I see it -- the way Anne decided I am not independant is because I told her that my mom is overprotective and she decided that I need that kind of thing -- and she was wrong. So the thing to change is to stop my mom from being overprotective. Well I was yelling at her about it for few years and it didn't work. I have no control over my mom. So you are going to tell me the same thing you said about relationships that I shouldn't worry about my mom and instead change myself. But then what ELSE in my "environment" should I look at?



Like I said, she is gone. She stopped talking to me a year ago.



Actually it was in a sense opposite to the way she perceived it to be. Basically we were studying in the library together. She was asking me whether or not I want to stay longer in the library or to go home. I wanted to be longer because I liked her company. However, I was too shy to admit it, so I was saying that it is up to her. So, from my side, I wanted to stay, but I weren't saying it in order to be nice. On the other hand, she perceived it as if I didn't really want to stay and only stayed because I thought she wanted me to.



Can you explain to me how you came up with this interpretation?



I think you missed the part of her email where she was mentioning how my mom shelters me. So, from the context, it has nothing to do with me trying to be nice TO HER. Rather, she decided that since my mom shelters me, that is something I need, and she can't do it to someone in a relationship.

You should pay attention to the way she broke it down into 3 different parts. In part 2 she was talking about my pampering her. On the other hand, in part 3 she was talking about my not being independant. So, obviously, in her head being or not being independant is totally separate issue form that.

To support my interpretation, when I was talking to her about it a week later, she brought up the fact that she cooks for me because she noticed how I forget to eat. Now, the interesting thing is that she offered herself to cook for me. So in other words if she is friend, she doesn't mind cooking. On the other hand, if she is "in a relatinoship" then yes it would be a problem. So obviuosly the problem is NOT about the time it takes to cook since in each case she feeds me 3 times a day. The problem is about giving me a title of a "boyfriend" despite my failure to win the "independance competition"




But you see, the point is that she decided that I am not independant because, as she put it, "your mom sounds like she shelters you and I had a feeling your ex girl friend did the same". But the thing is that I DON"T want my mom to shelter me, I am ANGRY at my mom that she does. So, how can Anne automatically decide taht just because my mom does something it means that I need it.



Again, you seem to be thinking that I am in contact with Anne right now which I am not. This whole discussion is about a year ago.




You see, this is precisely what leads me to conclusion that it is about giving credit. I mean, how come being close and being in a realtinship is not the same thing? What is the difference between the two? I can't think of any difference between being close and being in a relationship OTHER THAN the title. So that is how I am forced to overfocus on a title and conclude that Anne is obsessed about not wanting to give me credit.



But not all relationships lead to marriage.

As far as FYI, yes I do look for marriage, but there is no way Anne would of known it since I havne't brought up an issue of marriage, I only asked her to be "in a relationship".




Can you tell me which of my statement/behavior are you referring to?



So how far did you go in college? Did you get diploma?

Here's the logic. Would you respect someone of lower status than yourself? Would you want to be with someone you don't respect?



Of the single guys you know, most must be "nice guys". There are woman like that. They come you in a time of need, and leave you when they feel better. If that's your thing, then go for it.



Because there are a lot of bad fathers out there. (Note: This is a stereotype)



I don't recall having said that. Those are not the same. Have you ever heard anyone say "I'm relationship cold"?
Seriously, have you done any research yet? The only way self improvement works is if you are doing the improving.



That was her mother speaking. (Note: This is a stereotype)

I was actually referring to rejection at first encounters; and your question was in regards to 1st encounters.
Then you switch over to LJBF.



Your logic is flawed. How would meeting new people fix that; it will just expose you to more rejection?

The problem is that you have "problems" with being rejected.
Rejection is normal and perfectly acceptable. It's not personal, stop getting butt hurt.
How many people have you rejected? None? Did you use rejection as a way to personally attack them?
Do you still think you should feel bad about being rejected.



How about changing YOUR perception on things?

Another problem you have is that you won't be yourself around your mother. You're not the only person to have an overprotective mother. Do you think yelling at your mother is going to change anything? Have you tried to talk to her. Explain to her that her over protectiveness is interfering with the relationship you have with her? That you can't tell her anything because she'll try to fix your problems. That you're now a man and need to be responsible for your own life.



That's not an interpretation. Why do you have to act like it's the end of the world because your friend doesn't want to be more than just friends? Why does it have to be all about you?

Here is where your logic is really screwed. You say you want to be more than just friends. Yet, you then go on to say that you don't want to be more than just friends. WTF?

Are you aware of what everybody knows "more than just friends" to mean?



This is not a debate. Debates and Court Trials are about winning. They are not about find the truth and learning from it.

These are my opinions, my thoughts based upon my knowledge and experience.

Either you learn and grow, or you don't. And if you don't, then I'm wasting my time.

This isn't about proving why your right. Instead the goal is to find where you're wrong and make an improvement. And I'm also open to learning new things too.



I'm assuming she knew that you don't believe in pre-marital sex.

You asked her to be "in a relationship". What would be different than being close friends? And don't say that "giving credit" crap.



When you finally realize how screwed up your world view is you may get a strong desire to "snuff it".



I went to college because I didn't want to disappoint my dad, even after he kicked me out. I went for the wrong reasons and failed as a result.

I had 2 semesters of EET at DeVry. Few years later I took some misc courses at a community college.

That is precisely the point. The issue of giving credit and the issue of basing the choice of the partner on respect are really two sides of the same coin. WHat bothers me is the whole concept of relationship being based on something OTHER THAN emotional connection, namely respect. One simptom of this is the fact that people obsess over giving two different titles (relationship verses friendship) for two things that are identicle from a purely emotional closeness point of view. The other simptom of this is that they don't want to be with someone whom they don't respect EVEN IF that person would provide a great emotional connection.

Okay, I guess it is taken for granted by most people that respect is deserved. But the point is that due to Asperger there are things that I CAN"T HELP and yet other people judge me for them. So, as a result of this I simply began to get pissed off at the very concept of respect or disrespect and I now take "judge not les be judged" very literally. From most anyone's point of view this sounds silly since "of course" some people are better than others. The only reason it isn't silly for me is that I am stuck with Aspergers so I am FORCED to realize how ppl take for granted a lot of things that they shouldn't be. And so, due to this realization, I read into things and make silly-sounding conclusions like the whole issues about the "title". But they are not any more silly than my original thought of the concept of respect being futile.





You only further confirmed my point. You basically told me that the women that go for nice guys are fakes. In other words, if we cross out all the fakes, then NO ONE goes for nice guys. On the other hand, SOME women go for jerks. True, you said they need professional help. But still, how come there ARE women who go for jerks but not for nice guys.

Another question. How come you said most of single guys are "nice guys"? I mean, didn't you say yourself that the women who go after jerks are only FEW crazy ones? In this case, the rest of the jerks should remain single. So, in this case, how can most of the single guys be nice, unless these single jerks all disappeared from the planet?

Okay both of the above paragraphs are only based on *YOUR* statement that only crazy women go for jerks and tehre are only few of them. So, they are *NOT* my thoughts. I am simply trying to process what you said in your earlier replies.



Okay, given that I came from Russia in 94, I simply might not know some of the thigns you are referring to. I don't know what stereotype you are talking about. Can you spell it out, and give all the background info?



I know they are not the same. It is simply that it sounded that you said that htey are, so I was trying to perswade you how they aren't. But I guess I misunderstood what you were saying. Either way, let me provide you a quote where you SEEMED to be saying that they are the same:



So, basically my issue is to DEFINE a relationship. I was suspecting that relationship = credit. In order for this suspicion to go away, I need some OTHER definition of relatinship. So you came alone and told me that relationship = feeling. So I was saying that relationship=feeling one can't be right, and used some trivial examples to illustrate the point (the ones about strangers and about cheating). But now you said that you knew that relationship and feeling is not the same. So this brings me back to asking you what DID you mean in that above quote and what IS your definition of relationship?



I came from Russia at 14 so I am un-familiar with a lot of english expressions. I am not too sure what it might mean. I can make a few guesses but I guess it is safest to simply ask you.



But the point is that when I am confused about something, my mind fills in blanks. Once the blanks are filled, anything new that I learn will be twisted to conform to already existing theory. So, in order to learn something new, I should first un-learn everything that I learned incorrectly. But there wouldn't be any enciclopedias that would try to refute the theory that relationship is about giving credit, since I am the only person in the planet who have thought of it. So my only solution is to talk to someone alive who would be able to refute this theory. Only then I can learn the new thigns.

Now, when I try to talk to people, it usually doesn't go anywhere either. Lets put it this way. Suppose the thing to un-learn is A. So I will tell ppl that A is true because of B, and I would expect them to find a mistake in my logic. But, instead of finding mistake in my logic, they would simply present their own logic, and tell me that A is false because of C. But you see, this won't solve anything. In fact it will only make problem worse since now I have a paradox: on the one hand, B implies A, and on the other hand, C refutes A, which makes it a contradiction.

So what I want is for someone to strictly find a mistake in MY LOGIC as opposed to presenting THEIR logic. So taht is why it appears as if I am trying to debate or prove that I am right. My true intention is NOT to debate but rather for someoen to help me find holes in my arguments. And simply looking at enciclopedia won't do it because I can't explain my reasoning to enciclopedia in order for it to find holes in it.




Again, can you tell me what stereotype are you referring to?



Actually, I weren't making distinction between first encounters and otherwise. But again, I might simply be ignorant on how it is relevant. Can you explain the difference to me?



Thats why I don't understand why other ppl have to reject me on the first place. And this leads me to asking why they reject me on the basis of my not being happy, which ultimately lead us to the discussion of the fact taht I can't fix "problems" by getting to know more ppl, which brings us to above quote. So now it is circular.



But didn't you say yourself in the beginning of this reply that ppl don't want to be with someone they don't respect. So, if rejection = disrespect, then OF COURSE I should feel bad about being rejected. Thats why I disagree with the whole concept of respect being part of the equation, because that is precisely what forces me to take things so personally.



How does my perception of things affect relatinoships? I mean, people are not mind readers. And I haven't been confronting ppl about "giving credit" issue; that is something I am discussion here in the privacy of the message board.



But I am not going to admit to her that I keep things from her. Furthermore, even if she would stop being overprotective, I would continue to keep things from her simply because it was engrained for so long. The only reason I am yelling at her to stop being overprotective is that she pisses me off. And that thing is very separate from the whole thing about keeping theings from her. Granted, these two issues (being pissed off and keeping things from her) are both consequences of teh same thing (her being overprotective), but I only want to fix one and not the other.




I said it was interpetation because you have quoted a sentence from Anne's letter, and then you wrote your own sentence. So I was thinking that you were telling me that by writing what she wrote, she really meant she was going to "hunt me down and beat ..." and I simply don't see it in her letter. Hence my question of where you got this interpretation.



Where did I say I don't want to be more than just friends?



I am NOT aware of it. That is a point of my question. I want someone to define relatiship verses friendship for me.



Like I told you earlier, I am NOT trying to win. QUite the opposite, I want someone to point out holes in my arguments so taht I can un-learn my wrong ideas in order to learn the correct ones. So tahts why I appear to be debating.




That is precisely the question I am trying to ask YOU. What is the difference? If there is none, then what would be a purpose of her refusing to call it relationship? So there has to be. And, since I don't know which, my mind is forced to fill in blanks and say it is "giving credit". So, I want someone else to give me a real answer and that way I won't be filling gaps any more.



Why did your dad kick you out? I am sorry but I don't know you other than from this post, so can you give me a little background about yourself?




What does EET stand for?

Are there people that you don't respect? Would you be ok with having a deep emotional connection with them?

Woman who go for nice guys aren't fakes any more than woman that go for jerks. When they are down, they look for someone to treat them like a princess.

I didn't say most single guys are nice. I said most single guys that YOU know are nice. This is based upon the observation that all of the single guys you know are complaining about jerks. And only nice guys complain about jerks.

No I won't. The stereo type comment is flame retardant.



How about the correct one? Do you need logical proof that a dictionary is at least 90% correct before you'll look up words?



That is PROOF that relationship != feeling. Why didn't you just answer the question. I asked if you had heard anyone say that. Of course you haven't.



Don't ever get a job with any real consequences. You can't even assume for 1 second that something you know is wrong. With that kind of thinking, you'll try to cross a bridge, even though it is washed out.



So you are incapable of seeing your own mistakes? You are not able to question what you know?

AXIOM: B is false.

Hey, I don't know what you mean by "giving credit". But I think you were already getting it. You are oblivious to it because you don't know anything unless it is blatantly stated.

AXIOM: Relationships (friendships, etc.) don't operate on blatant statements.



How about you stop being lazy and find your own damn mistakes!! !



You don't have to understand why. Just accept that they will reject you. They will be able to tell that you're unhappy, and they are not going to trust you. Their guard will be up and it will be impossible for you to get closer.

And you don't get anywhere with a vicious circle. That is why you must change your reactions.



That's the problem with your perception. You believe you should react in a negative way.
It's not that rejection = disrespect, but that Lack of Respect leads to Rejections. They not disrespecting your good name. It's that you haven't given them something to respect. They are not going to give you props for being Johnnie downer.



Yeah, ok. Just keep telling yourself that. People read minds all the time. Not with a sixth sense, but with their eyes and ears. Oh, wait. They do use their sixth sense: emotions. If they feel uncomfortable around you, then they are going to be cautious.

My comments on your relationship with your mother: Ok, whatever.



Every time you said you didn't want sex.

When you asked to be her boyfriend:
You were think: I need blatant acknowledgement of our closeness. It's not enough for me to feel the closeness. I have to rub it in our faces that we have a certain closeness.
What she heard: He wants to have sex.



I have, like 20 times. But you REFUSE to change. You insist on being stubborn.

You can't be her boyfriend because she said so. Changing the meaning of boyfriend to make it applicable to the type of relationship that you have it erroneous.

That's not how English works. And I don't think Russian works that way either. That would defeat the purpose of dictionaries. If you want to describe what you have, you figure out what is the most applicable term.



I'm not here to hold your hand.



Again with "giving credit". But yet you won't go and find the answer yourself.

It ain't about the difference. Boyfriend is the step before engagement. No, ands, ifs, or buts about it.



Unvocalized difference of opinion.



Google says "Electronics Engineering Technology"

Okay, erase the word fake, and replace it with "sad women". So how come if you exclusively focus on women who are NOT sad, then there ARE happy women who are looking for jerks but there are NO happy women who are looking for nice guys?



Actually, I don't know anyone -- either male or female. Due to Asperger I am total loner. What I am saying about nice guys is based on what I read online as well as my own experience with women.



Okay as far as relationship NOT being feelings we are saying the same thing. I heard you saying that relationship is feelings, but I actually misheard you. So, I was trying to perswade you that relationship is NOT feeling, and you ended up saying that exact thing that I was trying to perswade you about.

Anyway, so we have established that relatinoship is NOT feeling. And that is where I was saying that it has to be a tilte. Because if it is neither feeling, nor sex, nor spending a lot of time together (me and Anne DID spend a lot of time together), then what else can it be?



Okay look, when I was talking about my mind filling in blanks, that was an example of my KNOWING how I am wrong. If I couldn't assume I am ever wrong, I won't be able to ACKNOWLEDGE anything about my mind doing wrong. The whole point is that I KNOW that the whole business about "giving credit" is wrong, but AT THE SAME TIME I can't help stop believing it simply because I can't think of any other explanation of what Anne did, which is why I am asking other people to help me out on this one.



Okay, I can question what I know. So, one way to question it is to simply note that love is not about giving credit. If people want to get credit then they would play sport, and that would be much more reliable since there would be a jury instead of just one person. Also, if it was all about credit, then all women would pick sport stars for their "boyfriends" whom they haven't ever met.

So, I do see how it is silly. But, AT THE SAME TIME, whenever I am trying to make sense of what Anne did, I am again forced to go back to the concept of giving credit, DESPITE my awareness of how silly it is. Why? Because when I am trying to compare Anne to the women who DID consider me a boyfriend, I don't see any difference since in neither case there was sex. So, this forces me to talk about "credit".

Once again, I KNOW that the concept of credit is silly, but the thing is that I can't avoid it due to the lack of other explanations.




By "giving credit" I mean giving me a title just for a sake of a title, which would mean that the only motivation is prestige (i.e. credit). And, once I am led to conclude that being boyfriend is about prestige, the logical conclusion is that being just frends is about humiliation.

You see, if sex was part of an equation, then there would be a PURPOSE for a distinction between friend and boyfriend, hence it woudl NOT be about credit. But, since sex is NOT part of the equation, there is no purpose of such distinction. Hence, I am forced to say that it is about credit.



But the point is that this leaves room for subjectivity. Now, due to my Asperger, whenever ppl are subjective, it is usually against me. Hence, I take it personally, and this leads me to overanalyze in order to make some "objective" sense of it.





But here goes vicious cycle. You tell me I should be happy. But I don't see how I can be happy if I simply accept that ppl reject me. I mean, if ppl reject me, they basically are saying that they know for a FACT that there is nothing good about me, because they don't even want to look further JUST IN CASE that they *MIGHT* miss something. So if they are so sure that there is nothing good about me, why should I be less sure? Okay fine, they don't know me well enough. But in this case they should keep looking just in case they will change their mind once they know me better. So the only reason for them to stop looking is that they saw something DEADLY which absolutely GUARANTEES my worthlessness. ANd if such is the case, why would I be happy?



But where is a connection between being un-happy and being un-trustworthy?



Fine, lack of respect leads to rejections. Still, here I am, with a particular rejection. So I ask myself, what leaded to this rejection? The answer is lack of respect. So, I see that I wasn't respected, and hence I feel bad about it.



So, if I simply haven't given them something to respect, why don't they wait for me to do so? Okay, I know the answer is that it isn't their job to wait because they have other thigns to do. But the point I am trying to make is that they have nothing to lose. So, I don't see why would they absolutely INSIST on "first impressions tell the most" if it wasn't for some kind of game with credits and personal judgements?





But I am not the only one who doesn't believe in pre-marital sex. How about all the other religious ppl? Do they call whatever they have a relationship?



I need a definition that would draw a line between Anne and my actual girlfriends. In neither case we had sex. In both cases we were close. Yet, Anne was NOT my girlfriend, while some other women were. So, how can you define a relationship in order for this to fit into definition?




Thats what I mean by giving credit. Because, it was NOT about what we did, but rather about what was SAID. So what was the purpose of anythign being said at all, other than credit of course?



But other girls, who didn't have sex with me either, still called me their boyfriend. Yet, Anne didn't. So that is where I have a question about a meaning of the words.



1) But then you contradict yourself because I remember how in your earlier responses you listed different kinds of relationships and you even included really short ones.

2)Okay, lets take it for granted that relationship is a step before engagement. In this case, the definition of relationship would be TRYING TO SEE if a candidate is eligeable for engagement. Trying to see is a crucial clausure because sometimes ppl have a relationship and then decide not to get engaged. But then, from a pure logic point of view, it would make the most sense to look at EVERYONE, that way you don't cut yourself short of information. Thus, by refusing to have a relationship with someone, you are basically saying that you refuse to even try to see whether or not that person might be eligeabel fro engagement, because you know that he isn't. In other words, you refuse to test your assumptions, and I don't agree with it at all.




Can you tell me more concretely? Just curious.

Have you been looking at woman in your league?



I don't think the AS is the problem. I think that it's your expectations.

Like I said before, the online sites are selling a product. They gear their site to make you focus only on the negative so that you must buy their solution.



You shouldn't EXPECT to receive credit for the type of relationship you're in. Relationships aren't about "me". They are about "us".

You and Anne WERE close friends. But, since you valued what to call the relationship over the relationship itself, you ruined what you had. You have proof that obsessing about it is bad, yet you continue to do it. You are unable to drop it and not worry about it.



Anne tried to continue having a relationship (but not a "relationship) with you. But you kept pushing her buttons. Anne knew that neither one of you were ready for anything more significant. But you didn't care how she felt. You were focused on how you and only you felt.



You use credit above like as to mean "stature". Do you view being "boyfriend" as a status symbol?



Your understanding of relationships is severely flawed. Social skills are needed to have any kind of relationship. Socials skills include player by the social rules.

These rules include not exhibiting symptoms personality disorders. You need to recognize these behaviors, learn to hide them, then learn to not feel that way.

I suggest exploring various disorders on wiki. Read through them and see if you recognize any traits or symptoms.

Here are some to start with:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferiority_complex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_%28psychology%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoidant_personality_disorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-esteem

I'm not saying you have any of these. Instead, by reading through these, you should learn a lot about yourself, and how you interact with other people.

Watch some movies with characters that have issues. Think about how their behavior interferes with their interactions with others.
"What about Bob"
I can't think of any Jim Carey movies to not watch.
High Tension, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, serial killer movies



They aren't measuring you up for worthiness as a person. They are looking for interest both in you, do you have something in common that you can relate to, and from you, are you displaying interest in the person. And they're looking for a bunch of other things too. This all happens for the most part in less that 1 second!



Risk management. Risk that you're going to take them down with you. Risk that your unhappiness may lead to an angry outburst.



You need to learn to not be dependent upon what other people think of you. You have fragile self-esteem and rely upon others for validation of you self-worth.



You need to accept that you can't be friends with everyone. That you don't have to be friends with everyone. That you shouldn't be friends with everyone.



This has to do with commitment and affection. You haven't talked about either.



Anne was not your girlfriend because she said so. You are going to have to learn what appropriate behaviors and thoughts are before you will be able to understand.



You can't expect to be given credit. That's not how it works.



It's subjective. Even though your friendship with them probably wasn't as significant as it was with Anne, they felt it was appropriate to refer to you as their boyfriend.



I was using the broad definition of relationship. True statement: You have a relationship with your mother. False statement: You are your mother's boyfriend.



Yes. But look at it as the relationship is growing closer.



Nope. If you do that, you won't have time to develop close and meaningful relationships with anyone.



That's the sacrifice. You are taking a gamble that this person, and the friendship, is worth investing in. You have to assume that the grass is NOT greener on the other side of the fence.

What does it mean "in my league"?



Like I told you in one of the earlier responses, my whole problem about rejection began in 2001 with that mailing list. Up untill that time I was thinking that only school matters and nothing else. So I haven't had friends both before 2001 and after 2001, just for different reasons. Before 2001 I was thinking they don't matter. After 2001 I felt socially incompetent. But the bottom line is that I haven't EVER had friends -- whatever reasons might be. WHy not? Because of Asperger. Everything else is just the way I emotionally DEAL with the situations that I encounter as a result of Asperger.



As far as I am concerned, I would rather have everyone forget about the whole concept of giving credit and focus on a real thing. But, unfortunately, people want to talk about credit. So, if OTHER PEOPLE insist on giving credit, then I want to be given credit since alternative would be humiliation. After all, if the society is divided into a "better" and "worse" group then OF COURSE I want to be part of "better" group. But it does NOT mean I agree with such a concept of division. I personally would like the concept to be removed altogether and for ppl to be treated as individuals and not as titles. But unfortunately it doesn't happen that way.



But if relationship is not about "me" but about "us" then how would you explain why people don't want to be in a relatinship with someone they don't respect? THe fact that they look at my personal characteristics that do NOT dirrectly affect them, is what makes it seem like it is about me. I would LOVE for it to be about us rather than me, then I won't have to be offended so much. But I just have difficulties explaining in the context of US why a woman wants me to be confident (which is strictly about ME).

Okay, lets put it this way. Suppose I am a nice guy. In the context of US, it is wonderful since I would bend backwords to please a woman. On the other hand, in a context of ME it is bad because it means that *I* am not strong person. So, if a relatinship is about US, then women would want to be with nice guys. On the other hand, if it is about me, hten they would walk away from nice guys. Now, I know the experimental fact that they are walking away from nice guys. So the experiment supports a theory that it is about me.

ANd once I say it is about me, it doesn't make any logical sense. So, the only way to rationalize anyting being about *me* is to talk about giving credit. SO, you hit a nail when you said it is about us and not me. If you will be able to explain to me how it is about us, I would no longer feel that it is about giving credit.



I think you misunderstood my question. When I said "I can't think of any other explanation of what Anne did" I was referring to her rejection letter, as opposed to anything that happened afterwords. In other words, I was saying I can't make sense of her letter without appealing to concept of credit. Because what her letter was saying was that it was fine with her if I am not independant as long as she doesn't call me her boyfriend. On the other hand if she calls me a boyfriend, hten I should be more independant than I am. At the same time she was more than willing to be close, even if I am not independant, as long as I am only "firned". So how come me being a "boyfriend" would change her expectations of my independance if we are close either way? The only thing I can think of is that "boyfriend" is a kind of credit so if she gives it to me she would want to see a justification for the "credit", i.e. me being independant.

Again, I KNOW that the real story is that she doesn't care about credit and I simply misunderstood her real motives. Thats why I want someone else to explain it to me. Because UNTILL I understand her real motives, I am forced to believe she was obsessed about credit.

In fact, I didn't think for a sec about the whole concept of the credit UNTILL I read her email. I simply invented such a concept in order to make sense of her email.




Again, I only came up with this concept as a result of trying to make sense of why she would want someone independant for her "boyfriend" as well as trying to make sense why she didn't mind being close while refusing to call me boyfriend all at the same time.



You see, thats one of the points I am trying to make. What is a purpose of social rules anyway? Why not just treat each other as individuals? WHenever I dwell on the concept of "player by social rules" I am forced to think that if we are talking about "players", we have some kind of game with winners and losers, and this brings back the whole concept of giving credit.



I do see myself having some simptoms of them. However, I think that I developed it as a RESULT of Asperger. There is no blood test for personality disorder. On the other hand, Asperger is a developmental disorder that traces back to early childhood. So, as a result of Asperger, I can develop simptoms of personality disorders as a result of misinterpretting social situaitons. I can likewise develop such simptoms in a response to ostracism that was originally caused by Asperger.

Anyway, I am going to simply look at DSM 4 criteria and say which simptoms I have and which I don't.



"1 frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment"

---- I DO fear abandonment whenever I am in a relationship with someone and I keep asking questions as to whether or not I did something wrong, or else I find indirrect ways of manipulating the girl to find out whether or not she holds something against me without actually asking her. HOWEVER, I do NOT actually make an EFFORT to avoid abandonment in a sense that I never think ahead of time whether or not if I do something it will allienate the other person. Quite the opposite I often think "sure it isn't a good idea to do such and such but may be it will be okay if I do it just THIS time". So after spending some time stopping myself from doing X, Y, and Z, I end up doing it anyway. My whole worry of abandonment is always an afterthought, even though 90% of these afterthoughts are groundless and in many cases the woman actually forgot the original thing I was worried about but instead is allienated by my constant questioning of her. However, even if I am on my best behavior, I would still ahve fear of abandonment every time the woman is busy with something or whatever. Basically, I would be dwelling onto different sentences that I were saying and thinking that may be I accidentally misphrased something and came across as saying something I didn't mean to say. Since I don't have photographic memory, there is always a room for thoughts such as "may be instead of saying this word I accidentally said some other word" or whatever. I can also start thinking that may be I misunderstood her needs, etc. But then it turns out my worries were completely off base because she was simply busy with something.

"2 a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation"

---- I do NOT idealize/devalue anyone else AS A PERSON. In fact I rarely judge other people. Well I might acknowledge some facts about their character, but I wouldn't dwell on it as long as it doesn't affect the way they treat me. ON THE OTHER HAND, I have a DIFFERENT VERSION of jumping between extremes. IN particular, my two extremes are either perception of another person as all-forgiving with whom anything and everything is fine no matter how rude or aggressive, and the other extreme of that person dwelling into every little thing I did wrong and my constantly being in danger of losing them. Typically, when I just get into a relationship, I would contrast the new woman I am with, to everyone else who broke up with me. And I would decide that she is the most understanding woman in a world which is the only way I would explain why she appears to be more tolerant to me than everyone else. So, since she is radically different to every other woman, I can use her as a crunch. But after I use her as a crunch long enough, I begin to notice that she distances herself a little bit, and begin to be totally obsessed about it. Looking back, I realize that actually she was very close to me still. HOwever, back then since I expected her to be perfect, even the fact that she distances herself by a sentimeter made me totally upset and ultimately caused me to act out in various ways untill this acting out caused a REAL problem. So, I guess I do see some analogies between jumping from idealization to devaluation. But, at the same time, it isn't the same thing because I am not judging her, but rather I am evaluating the way she sees me.

"3. identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self"

---- The thing I notice about my self image is that I don't have a "mental mirror" so to speak. I would need to make a conscious effort in order to see how I come across. I have also noticed that other people would think that I am upset, or that I feel uncomfortable, while I wouldn't know what they are talking about. But then again, you can't draw a line where sense of self ends and social deficit begins. After all, another part of equation is that my behavior might be socially inappropriate due to Asperger so thats why when other ppl try to make sense of it they would say that may be I am uncomfortable, while the real thing is lack of social awareness.

"4. impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating; [not including suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5])"

---- I do NOT use any substance, in fact I am non-smoker and non drinker. I also don't drive, which is because back in Russia a lot of ppl don't, for financial reason, so once I moved to USA I simply didn't view it as a must. The same applies to my family, none of my family drives either. I probably should learn to drive at some point, but things get postponned because of school. I guess the things that are left from that list are spending and binge eating. I do have a problem that whenever I pass some kind of food store or vending mashine I would always go there and buy something. THis is a problem in light of the fact that during my first two years of graduate school when I was payed $1600 a month and I had a rent of $450, I ended up spending all of the rest of the money. Well, to be fair to myself I werne't payed during the summer, but still I had "just enough" to get through the summer. RIght now that I ran out of support, I have no idea what I should do, but I still can't quit my habbit. But at the same time I don't know whether it would really qualify as "binge eating" becuase I don't think I am doing anything unhealthy given that I have high metabolic rate and my weight was around 140 lbl for the past 5 years regardless of how much or little I eat. My only concern is financial one.

"5 recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior "

---- This simply doesn't apply to me

"6 affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days)"

---- This only happends in social context. Yes it happends a lot. However, it typically last MUCH longer than few hours or few days. WHen I am being treated wrongly I obsess about it for at least few weeks.

"7 chronic feelings of emptiness"

---- Yes I do feel empty. However, this might be due to the fact that I don't do anything other than study, don't have any friends, etc.

"8 inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)"

---- Yes I do have anger problems. Sometimes I swear at ppl and can't control myself. But I was NEVER physically agressive; only verbally.

"9 transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms"

---- In the situations when I have roommate or when I am in a field trip, I feel that I am being watched, and that whenever I don't hear every word in conversation it has to be about me. Sometimes I also notice that different people who don't know each other seem to be teeling me the same thing, and I have a feeling that perhaps they do know each other and they discuss me behind my back. Sometimes I also feel that some of the things my mom is telling me is dirrectly related to my situation with the girls that I am not telling her about and she deliberately talks in general terms because she knows that I don't want her to know some things so she hides the fact that she knows. HOWEVER, I never felt that anyone wants to poison me or anything like that. My suspiciousness is restricted to what people THINK or TALK about, but NOT to any kind of actions on their part.




That would be the result of my being hurt due to Asperger. It is normal for people who have low social status to develop inferiority complex.



I would just go look at Narcisistic Personality DIsorder over here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissist ... y_disorder

"1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) "

---- That was true untill 2001 when I was fascinnated with the fact that I was several years ahead of others academically and was taking as many math and physics courses as possible although it didn't help me on a long run since they were just MATH and PHYSICS courses, but NOT the courses relevent to the area of physics I wanted to specialize at. HOWEVER THIS WHOLE THING WENT AWAY IN 2001 WHEN I WAS HURT IN A MAILING LIST. After that time I no longer cared about my academic career altogether and was only preoccupied with being rejected.

"2 is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love"

---- When i was little I had fantasies of being better physicist than EInstein. But then again a lot of little kids have fantasies. On the other hand, personality disorder begins in adolescence or young adulthood so it isn't relevent.

"3 believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by other special or high-status people (or institutions, eg: Harvard and other Ivy League institutions) "

---- No doesn't apply to me

"4. requires excessive admiration"

---- I do require it from my girlfriends, but that is a result of the fact that unless they keep reminding me that they love me, I begin to think that they are no longer interested. I do NOT require admiration from anyone OTHER THAN my girlfriends or ppl I am close to.

"5. has a strong sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations"

---- That would be true in a sense that whenever I mis-treat people, I feel "intitled" for them to listen to my explanations and forgive me. I guess also the fact that I talk about myself a lot and expect other people to listen to all this might somewhat resemble it, but then again I would NOT agree with a statement that I am entitled to talk about myself all the time, even though I act that way. But again, it is all in a context of my social failures and rejections, that make me want to use other people as psychiatrists in a sense.

"6. takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends"

---- I guess if the apportunity came alone, I would. But the point is that due to Asperger, I very rarely have a chance to do that. Overall, I may be have 1 or 2 chances a year to take advantage of someone, and perhaps I use up half of them.

"7. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others "

---- That is also true. But this is a simptom of Asperger's.

"8. is often envious or believes others are envious of him or her"

---- Yes, I am envious, but NO I do NOT believe that others are envious of me. The reason I am envious is mainly because I feel that due to my Asperger's I am always at a disadvantage.

"9. has arrogant affect, haughty behaviors or attitudes"

---- Thats the way I sometimes come across to others. But then again it all goes back to whether I actually mean to be arrogant or wheter it is something I can't control due to asperger and poor social skills. This line is very hard to draw. On the one hand I can look back and say that I didn't have AUTOMATIC way of taking other ppl into consideration. But on the other hand, if I go back to analyze every little thought that went through my head, then yes I might say that perhaps I knew what I was doing but chose to ignore it. But then again, should you REALLY expect anyone to analyze all of tehir thoughts given that we have million of thoughts per second. And also, NT-s are guilty of the same thing they just hide it better. So perhaps lack of AUTOMATIC social skills, which is Asperger, is what putts me on a different level from other people.



"1. avoids occupational activities that involve significant interpersonal contact, because of fears of criticism, disapproval, or rejection"

---- My job doesn't require the interaction with other people.

"2. is unwilling to get involved with people unless certain of being liked"

---- I don't have too many apportunities to be involved with people. SO I will have to focus on isolated examples. So, this summer when my mom wanted me to go to trip to Israel I didn't really want to go because I was scared they won't like me. However, I went there anyway, becuase I was too scared to admit this fear to my mom (by the way, my fear of being dis-liked in a trip to Israel ended up being TRUE, since a lot of people kept making fun of me on that trip). On the other hand, when it is something I come up on my own, such as joining a dating site, or going to church, I am NOT scared of rejection. QUite the opposite I keep hopping for the best since I already do feel rejected and I need to do something to change it.

"3. shows restraint within intimate relationships because of the fear of being shamed or ridiculed"

---- I do show restraint in a sense that I expect a woman to innitiate all the conversations and to lead a relationship. However, I am NOT scared she would ridicule me. Rather I am scared that she would think it within her head and not say it out of being polite.

"4. is preoccupied with being criticized or rejected in social situations"

---- Yes, this applies to me

"5. is inhibited in new interpersonal situations because of feelings of inadequacy"

---- I always expect other people to approach me and start talking to me. I am scared to innitiate a conversation because I feel that if people don't approach me first, it means they don't want to talk to me.

"6. views self as socially inept, personally unappealing, or inferior to others"

---- I do view myself as such. But the point is that it is a reality, due to Asperger's.

"7. is unusually reluctant to take personal risks or to engage in any new activities because they may prove embarrassing"

---- I guess I am not sure what this is saying. I mean, if it is PERSONAL risks, meaning I do it totally on my own, why would it be embarassing if no one watches me. On the other hand, if people do watch me, then yes I would be reluctant to do things. But when I am on my own, I always like to be creative because I want to "run away".




The thing is that I moved away from home strictly in order to go to school at another state. So, I didn't bring with me a TV or anything else other than what I need for school. Given that I keep from my mom that I do anything other than school, there is no way I would be able to ask her to bring TV to my place. Likewise, if I buy my own one, I would have to through it away the next time my mom visits me, which would be a huge waste of money.



BUt you said it yourself that hte reason they reject nice guys is because they can't respect them. So in the context of nice guys they DO measure me for worthiness as a person.



But in this case how would calling me "friend" instead of "boyfriend" would reduce such risk? I mean Anne was still around me all the time.



If other people were to test their assumptions then I would NOT depend on their opinions. Becuase testing an assumption ammounts to acknowledgement that they might be wrong. On the ohter hand, the fact that they refuse to test their assumptions ammounts to them saying that they know things with 100% certainty. ANd if such is the case, then why shouldn't I listen to them?

I guess it isn't exactly validation. If I were to live in a desert, I would be doing just fine. But the FACT that other people already DID evaluate me WITHOUT me asking them, is what made me want to ask for a re-evaluation since I am unhappy with the one that I have.



THe point is that the only people who refuse to test their assumptions are the ones who do NOT like me since they are the only ones who cut themselves from all the additional evidence by not communicating with me. Now, like I mentioned previously, the refusal to test assumptions ammounts to being 100% certain. So in other words, the only people who are 100% certain are the ones who hate me, which means that their negative evaluation overweights the positive one of the ppl who like me. Thus, as long as there is ANYONE who hates me I can't be happy since they would be a person I would listen to.



As far as affection, I DID have affection with Anne. At least, with the way she talked she have shown that she cared about me as a person.



Can you be more specific re: appropriate behaviors and thoughts?



Like I said, I would rather if NO ONE was given credit because the whole concept is silly and diminishes love and personal connection. What happened was that I read between the lines that Anne was obsessed about credit, and I was offended at teh concept. So, AS LONG AS OTHERS ARE OBSESSED ABOUT CREDIT, yes I want credit just so that I am not falling into "inferior" group of OTHER PEOPLE'S biases. But once again I don't agree with it at all. Thats why I keep talking about it because I WISH it wasn't about credit so I want someone to explain to me that in fact my interpretation is wrong and it is in fact something other than credit, in which case I would feel a lot better.




But you said it yourself that you can't change meanings of words. Now, it seems that this is exactly what Anne did. Because other girls did exact same thing and called me boyfriend. But then when Anne came alone she changed the meaning of words to call the same exact thing a friendship. So, then I sit and think why would she change a meaning of words? And my only conclusion is that may be she makes a point NOT to give me credit.




But me and Anne also grew closer.



But if you are talking about TIME, then didn't Anne still spend a lot of time with me even if we were friends? So, didn't that time still took away from her time of finding potential boyfriends for a simple reason that she can't be at two places at once?




But you see in case of gambling there is always something to win AND smething to lose. But here I don't see anything to lose by pursuing someone and then deciding you aren't interested. I know you said time, but once again Anne wasn't that busy at all. She even told me that due to her bipolar she only had two friends -- myself and someone at the town where she was from. So what would be a sacrifice if she were to try to persue a "relationship" with me?

On your level. For example, a famous actress would not be in your league. Not to say it couldn't happen, it's just very unlikely.



That is only because YOU, not anyone else, choose to feel humiliated if someone isn't interested in getting to know you.

You need to change your mode of thinking. You don't know enough about human interaction for your "black and white" pure logical thinking to work.



You're the one who is putting importance upon titles. It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. Just what you believe.



Most woman are disgusted by nice guys. They are push overs. They have no spine. They are weak. They let people walk all over them.

You are free to be a nice guy, but don't expect to be respected for it. Very few will respect a man who can't hold his own ground.



It's about you. It's about her. It's about both of you. If you have forgotten, "us" includes "me". You just can't focus on yourself. You have to keep the other person in view.



Until you stop giving importance to titles, it won't make sense. Learn to accept it.



You misunderstood me. Anne recognized that neither one of you were ready for a more significant relationship. And you communicated this to you.

But you have to be a self centered blockhead. You view is "me, me, me". "I want to be called BF because I need validation of self."



Actually, she didn't want you to think you had something that you didn't. But you need to let go of logic to see that.



I have told you several times what her motives are. And they are right their in the email. But you are blinded by your self centered logic.

Tell, you what. You just keep on obsessing about trying to get the title of BF. Let me know if you're ever happy. Why do you insist on holding onto a stupid idea. Why can't you just let it go on the assumption that it's wrong. You know it's wrong, but yet you insist on believing it's true.

You are using it to "fill in a blank" to a logical result. But that result is wrong. You're whole train of thought is wrong. It's all because you have an erroneous view of what friendships are about.



It's about having the same protocol. It's the first level of compatibility. It's about human behavior. The behavior of person A will be defensive if person B approaches and exhibits irregular behavior. These are primal instincts; this is the part where real life goes in the face of religion.

You have to step away from the should be's of the idealized world you live in. You must accept the world for how it operates. Not how you think it should.

Would you be a little nervous if I guy with a gun walked up to you and wanted to chat? Would you be concerned if he had the gun pointed at you, finger on the trigger, and was petting the barrel?



I didn't want you to simply do that. You need to read the whole thing so that you can pick up on odd behaviors embedded within the text. I didn't provide the links for you to do a diagnosis. And, I didn't want you to look at only those pages either.

I provided them so you can read them and recognize traits about yourself that might make people cautious around you.



Like I said before. Having friends doesn't solve your problems. It just distracts you. You may benefit from having a hobby, or sport. Maybe, something where you interact with people.



It works both ways. Maybe someone thinks that you're not interested in them because YOU won't walk over to them.



You have two options. You can use Aspergers as an excuse, and assume that you can't change, that your behaviors are permanently etched into a static machine. Or, recognize that your brain is very capable of learning new behaviors and skills.

For example. You may be mind blind because of Aspergers. That doesn't mean you can't learn how to read body language. You just have to learn in a different way than most people do.



You keep mixing first encounters with ongoing relationships. Regardless, if Anne called you boyfriend, you may decide that you're "entitled" to addition treatment.



They don't assume 100% certainty. You deal with probabilities. Is anything 100%? No. They do a cost benefit analysis, and conclude that your not worth investing in. Sounds cruel? Well, you do it to. Every time that you don't approach someone, you are telling them that they are not worth your time.



They are not doing the evaluation for you. They are doing it for themselves. If you need validation, you are the one responsible for evaluating the positive things in your life.

If you're not able to open your mind to how things really are, you may be happier as a hermit.



And let me flip that around. You assume, with 100% certainty, that anyone who isn't interested in you hates you. You assume, with 100%, that any girl who won't call you BF hates you. What you fail to realize is that there is a 99.9999% probability that you have your head up your ass.

You state that your views are wrong, yet you continue to treat them as true.



Did YOU show her affection? Were you committed to Anne?



Do the research yourself.



You are caught in the credit trap. As long as you care about status, you will be in the "inferior" group.



That's not how it's defined.

Boyfriend has a more serious meaning to Anne than it does to you. The definition hasn't changed, just the appropriate usage.



That statement is flawed. Anne didn't want a BF, so she wouldn't of been looking for one.

Why didn't you know that?



Again, you have mixed up first encounters with on going friendships. You don't see any loss because you are looking at your POV, and no one else. In the case of your relationship with Anne, time wasn't a problem. In her letter she says why she doesn't have a BF.

Well, my current girlfriend is on my level. She has bipolar, Asperger, and NLVD. SHe is similar to me in that she also likes to overanalyze, and she is very patient whenever I feel like questioning her or wahtever. I guess she has similar fears of abandonment that I do, so she looks up to me for approval and she feels that each time I don't call her it is rejection. So this is a good thing because I get plenty of attention from her.



I guess whether or not it is humiliating has to do with exactly what goes on in the other person's mind. Since I can't read other people's minds, the best I can do is analyze, and my analysis leads me to thinking that the content of their thoughts is humiliating. BUt again, I can't read ppl's minds, and that is why I am talking about it in order for other ppl to correct my mis-perception.

But the point is that I can't simply CHOOSE not to feel humiliated. The only way to do it is to first correct my perception of what their thoughts are.



Okay, remember how you said that you are answering me 20 times and it doesn't get across. The reason is that your answers are basically re-statement of the questioned concept just in different words. So, I was asking why women don't like nice guys and your answer is that it is because nice guys are weak. SO then the question is why don't women like weak guys.

What I am asking is that if guys let everyone walk over them, it would be bad for that guy alone; he doesn't hurt the woman he is with if he letts others to walk over him. So, why should she care?

Thats the thing I find insulting, that people judge me for things that are strictly about ME and doesn't affect anyone else. And that is precisely what makes me talk about totles. Title = judging = worrying about personal characteristics that don't affect anyone else other than the person.



Okay, I guess the point is taht us is NOT the same as me + her. Rather, us is the sum of ASPECTS of us that interract with each other. Now, if I let some third party to walk all over me, this doesn't affect her. It only affects me. So why would she not like me because of it?



Again, you are simply re-stating a questioned concept just in different words. The question is WHY was she thinking I weren't ready? Can you explain to me, WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE CONCEPT OF TITLES, why would it be wrong for her to be in a relationship with someone who isn't confident?



Okay, I see what you are getting at. FOr example little kid wants to eat candy. His mom tells him "this is bad for your teeth", and little kid simply says "but I WANT candy". In my case it isn't that way. No one told me anything about the teeth; they simply told me "don't eat candy because I said so", and so no wonder when I am trying to figure out just why don't they want me to eat candy I came up with ridiculous explanations such as "they don't want to give me credit", and this only makes me want to eat candy all the more. If I were told about the teeth, then I would no longer be upset about it, because I would know that they are worrying about my teeth, as opposed to (INSERT SUSPISION HERE)

Likewise, if Anne were to tell me that it is important to her that her partner is independant because of X, Y, and Z, then I would no longer feel it is about credit. Rather, I would know it is about X, Y, and Z. But since she never explained it to me, I am forced to overfocus on credit part. Now, X, Y, and Z would obviously include the difference in our behavior when we are friends and we are in a relationship. So, if I were given a list of CONCRETE things that are being done when we are in a relationship and ONLY when we are in a relationship, then I would be cool. I would say "fine, it is too hard for her to do these concrete things, and thats why we are friends". But you see, the whole point is that I cna't think of a single thing that my real girlfriends did, while Anne didn't do. So, untill I can think of some of these things, I am forced to feel that it is about credit.



Okay here is another example of why you answer me 20 times and I never hear an answer. Okay, in your previous responses you were telling me that we are not in a relatinship because she said so. Then I asked you why did she say so. And now you said that she said so because she doesn't want me to believe I have something that I don't, which brings me right back to original question why is it I don't have it. And you will say because she said so, which makes it a perfect circle.

Anyway, the question is, what IS it that I don't have? You said that she doesn't want me to believe I have something which I don't. The question is what IS that something? The fact that I can't DEFINE this something is what forces me to fill in a blank and say it is credit. So, I need your help in defining it.



In that email she said "when she is in a relatinoship with someone, she expects that person to be very independant and confident in himself as individual". But the quesiton is WHY is this the case? She didn't explain it, she simply STATED that it was the case. Okay, fine, if I read further, then she does talk about benefits of my being independant. She says that if I were independant I would challenge her ideas, push her to be the best person she can be, etc. But the gap in the logic is that while she explains why it is nice for me to be independant, she does NOT explain why it should be related to my title. Basically, due to the fact that I can't "challenge her ideas" she missed out something. But how does refusing to call me a boyfriend wouldd remedy this problem? It won't. So this leaves me again wondering what can be a motive rather than just a title.



You see, in the situation with a guy with a gun, my fear would be LOGICALLY justified. I would simply use logic to say that his motive is to shoot me, WITHOUT appealing to the concept of him going against social rules. ON the otehr hand, the kinds of htings I question is when people go AGAINST all rules of logic in order to subscribe to the rules of the game.




As far as feeling of emptiness, it does. I mean why would I feel empty if I have plenty of friends.




In order to learn something, I need practice. But due to the fact that I don't have social skills to start with, no one talks to me, so I don't have any apportunity to practice, and this makes it into vicious cycle.



In case of Anne, it would of probably lasted months and months if I weren't acting out. So in this case it would NOT be a "first encounter". So how would this long term friendship be any different from a relationship?



Like what kind of treatment? I mean she was studying with me every day, inviting me to the movie, inviting me to run with her, offering to cook for me 3 times a day, etc. So can you think of something she did NOT do?



When you invest money, there is something to lose, that is, money. But in the case of human interaction, I don't htink of what is there to lose. Thats why I need logical explanation. If someone were to explain to me that they would lose A, B, and C, then I would follow your analogies of gambling and investment, and then I would understand how it can work WITHOUT anyone knowing anything 100%. So my problem is that I simply can't think of anything to lose, which leads me to feel that 100% certainty is the only thing that would prevent ppl from FREE lotteries. So, I need some kind of explanation of why the lottery, or investment is NOT free. In other words, I need some logic.



In my case, the thing I am afraid of losing is feeling embarassed if it turns out that I am not welcomed. I agree that it probably applies to others too, but it doesn't apply to Anne since Anne knew she was welcomed. So, in her case, one would have to think of something else she would lose.



In this case why would it matter if I am a nice guy who lets everyone to walk over me? I mean, this would only hurt ME and not THEM. So if they are doing evaluation for themselves, why would they care? I only allow ppl to walk over ME, not over THEM.



Remember how I said that the only reason I believe others know something with 100% certainty is that they simply walk away as opposed to talk to me and give me a chance to quesiton their assumptions. On the other hand, I am talking about it right here. So I don't know it with 100% certainty -- if I did, I won't have to make any posts to discuss it. If everyone were to agree to sit down and discuss their position with me, I would stop complaining about htem believing in anything with 100% certainty.



Okay, let me give you an example. In physics, sometimes when I misunderstand something in a book, I end up proving something wrong. So then I go to my advisor, present to him a proof of something wrong, and ask him to refute it. I KNOW that it is wrong, yet it doesn't stop me from asking the advisor to refute it for me. I am doing here the same exact thing. THe only difference is that due to the fact that it has more emotinal impact on me than physics, this wrong idea infulences my thoughts more. But still, just like with physics, I konw I am wrong, and I look for someoen to help me get over it.



Okay, since I am trying to discuss the email, the only relevent part is what happened BEFORE that email was sent, and this was only a week. During this particular week, I guess it was totally unexpected to me how fast we progressed, so I didn't have time to prepare to reciprocate the affection. So, I do remember few times when she have shown me affection, which I didn't reciprocate, and later I would dwell on the fact that I didn't reciprocate it, and would send her follow up emails that are meant to say something I should have said right away. But of course I didn't want her to konw that I was obsessed over things I said or didn't say because in this case she would simply stop trusting things that I say since she would know that I am so concerned about saying the "right" thing that I might distort things. So I guess the way I came back in my subsequent emails to things that was originally said was deliberately made very tangential and thus I didn't respond to nearly everything she said, only to some small protion of it.

But anyway, I don't think it is relevent to her rejection, because she never mentioned this.




I don't understand this question. I mean we weren't in a relatinoship.



So, waht IS the meaning of boyfriend?




But her email has parts 1, 2, and 3 separate. So I was implicitely taking 1 and 2 away and focusing on 3. So, lets say that few months later she totally recovers from depression, which takes away 1. And alos after some times she understands me better, which takes away 2. So, then, we go right back to that thing I was asking.



[/quote]

Again, I want to focus exclusively on part 3. One way to do it is by realizing that the time would of cured parts 1 and 2.

Okay to make it brief and sweet, my question is how can you give CONCRETE differences between relationship and friendship. If there are concrete differneces, then I understand how these concrete things might be hard to do in light of certain circumstances, so my question is gone. On the other hand, if there aren't any concrete differences, tehn I am forced to say that it is about title.

Now, here is what makes it hard to point out concrete differences:

RELATIONSHIP

---- I don't believe in pre-marital sex, so I won't be having sex even if I AM in a relatinship

FRIENDSHIP

---- Anne was cooking for me
---- Anne was inviting me to the movie
---- Anne was inviting me to run together
---- We were studying together all day long, every day
---- Anne was sharing with me her thoughts and feelings
---- Anne considered me one of her two closest friends.


So, in light of the thigns listed above, do you still see ANYTHING that would be present in a relationship and NOT in friendship?

It's subjective. But since you refuse to take into account Anne's feelings, you will always be caught up on it.

Since you're hung up on it, you will continue to piss people off. And you'll keep pushing them away.

You seem to have a VERY traditional view of relationships. You need to remember that other people have different views. And you need to take those values into consideration.

You need to step out of your ideal "black and white" world, and accept life for it's subjectiveness.

As long as you stick to your guns, you'll continue hurting people.

If I were refusing to take Anne's feelings into account, why would I be spending so much time trying to UNDERSTAND them. In fact, the very fact that I feel OFFENDED implies that I do take into account her feelings. Otherwise, why would I be offended at a piece of furniture? Also, the very fact that I worry about the title again implies that I want to know what is in other people's heads. Because thats what title is about -- what other ppl think. So if I didn't care about it, I won't care about title.

The whole point is that in the process of trying to make logical sense of her feelings I got confused and filled in blanks a wrong way. So now I want to know the REAL thing that she feels.



But I am NOT confronting Anne or anyone else about the "title" issues. I keep it all inside my head and use this forum to discuss it.



First of all, I haven't been formally taught anything about the relationships. I never talked about relationships to my parents because I keep the whole thing from them. So, I don't even KNOW what the "traditional view" is, let alone believing in it. Everything I came up with is strictly based on my own analysis of events.

By the way, I believe I expressed two opposing views:

1)What relationship SHOULD be, and that is where I was saying how I don't think anyone should be judged by any personal characteristics and how women should like nice guys.

2)What relationship IS, and that is where I was talking about "giving credit".

So, my dillema is that I would WANT it to be number 1, but I see people playing by number 2.

So, which of these is traditional? Number 1 or number 2?



Are you saying that I believe number 1 and I have to take into account that others believe number 2, or are you saying that I believe number 2 and I have to take into account that others believe number 1? Again it goes back to my question of which of these two is considered a "traditional" view.



But you see, the point is that the notion of relatinship doesn't provide for continuous spectrum. YOu either have a relationship or you don't. So probably this kind of dichotomy is what is at the root of my feelings being hurt.

Either way, if you have $1000000 then no amount of subjectiveness would make you say that you are poor. So, to me it just seems plain obvious that me and Anne were VERY close thats why I can't see why we were considered "friends" without inventing some other concepts such as "title".

If you took her feelings into account, you would have accepted that she did not feel it was appropriate to refer you as her boyfriend.

What she felt was that you two were very close, but it would be a bad idea for the relationship (i.e. friendship) to develop any further until you BOTH were ready.

Have you figured the commitment thing out yet? Looked it up by chance?

Really. Please describe such an incident. I would like to interpret for myself.



If you look ask a population what the "requirements" for a relationship are, you will find a spectrum attributes.

If you look individuals, you will a person list of requirements. And, each item will fall on a spectrum of importance.

You need to realize that Anne's list is different that your list.



If that $1M was all that you were ever going to have, then I would say that you're going to very poor.

Did you ever here about the software engineers in the Bay Area who were making $80k/year, yet were living out of a station wagon?

It really is subjective.

I do accept it. All I want to know is "why". There is no reason for me to force her to call me a boyfriend because if I force someone to give me title, why would I be proud about it anyway? So, I am trying to understand WHY she doesn't think it is appropriate to call me boyfriend AS OPPOSED TO actually forcing her to do it.

The point is that "taking other people's feelings into account" refers to action. So, if I weren't confronting Anne face to face about calling me a boyfriend, then yes I took her feelings into account. Of course, my THOUGHTS aren't that pure. But no one can control their thoughts, plus they don't hurt anyone as long as they don't become action. So having thoughts doesn't mean not taking her feelings into account.



So you said "relationship (i.e. friendship)". If such were the case, I would have NO questions about it becuase in this case I won't have to worry about the distinction. But the problem is that FRIENDSHIP was in fact developping further and further, and that is precisely what raises the question.



Commitment means that you don't cheat. How does it relate to my questions?



The incident is what happened with Anne. Because that was precisely when I developed that whole idea bout credit. And yes I would be glad if you interprete it yourself because then I won't have to worry about credit any more.



I do realize it. My question is what IS her list? If I knew her list, I won't need to fill in blanks any more and hence I would no longer be paranoid about credit.

Okay I know that if each person has their own list then you don't know Anne's list because you don't know her. But here is a short cut for you. Just come up with some SAMPLE list taht would explain Anne's decision of what to call what.



Okay, when you made a claim that $1M isn't that much you gave an EXAMPLE of something that is more (i.e. engineers in Bay Area). Now, can you do the same thing with Anne. Can you give me an EXAMPLE of a relationship (WITHOUT sex) that would be MORE than what I had with Anne.

You do know that you aren't entitled to know anyones personal feelings. If they don't want to do something, they don't have to tell you why.

Anne did tell you why.
1) She wanted to improve her self before devoting herself to anyone
2) She feels that she doesn't know you well enough yet
3) She wants you to be more autonomous as an individual



Anne didn't want it to develope further. You did. Then you changed to meaning of "boyfriend"



Did she say "I don't want to give you credit for something that we don't have."?

I think you "wanted credit" before the incident.

Did you ever respond to this question in Anne's letter?


In what ways did you show Anne affection?



You don't need to know why. Just respect her decision.

You are right that they don't have to tell me why. At the same time, no one can stop me from thinking about it in my head and trying to figure it out. So, thats what I do.



The part that she didn't tell is further explanation about part 3 and why is part 3 important. So that is where I was filling in blanks.



But the point is that Anne was the one who approached me on the first place, and also she was the one who invited me to run together, study together, and go to the movie. Furthermore, her email was merely a RESPONSE to my proposal for a relationship. Otherwise, there were no indication that she wanted to stop the friendship from developping.



She didn't. This is what I came up with when I was trying to interpete part 3 of her email as to exactly WHY would she want the person in a relationship to be independant. My conclusion from part 3 was also supported by my theory on how to explain why we were close despite only being friends. But like I said this is just my own attempt of filling in blanks.



Yes, I wanted self-validation and approval before the incident. But I haven't had an actual concept of credit. In fact prior to incident I was viewing friendship as also a form of approval, just to lesser extend. The concept that friendship is humiliating because of lack of "credit" is something I developed strictly after the incident.

I guess probably the need for self-validation prior to incident is what was a "fertil soil" for the development of concept of credit afterwards.



Actually, this is the part I really blame myself for. If I did respond, there would of been further communication and I won't have to make all these crazy guesses. SO this is actually a big issue of TIMING -- a silly clumsinnes on my part that is probably due to Asperger. I happened to be by the computer reading the email about 5 minutes before I was supposed to see her. So I didn't have time to read it carefully. In fact, I read parts 1 and 2 and only SKIMMED over part 3 and decided that part 3 is basically elaboration on part 2. And therefore I missed on a MAJOR thing that worries me. If part 3 is an elaboration of part 2, then I am happy to admit that indeed I am hard to read sometimes, so it is cool. On the other hand, if part 3 talks about the fact that I need SHELTERING, then it is simply wrong. And it is especially wrong since she says that she judges things by the way my mom shelters me.

But the point is that I discovered that whole sheltering business at part 3 only AFTER I met with Anne. So, during our meeting, I managed to allienate her due to acting all nervious due to her email. So then she didn't want to talk about it any more. Later, she changed her mind and said she will talk about it after the semester is over and gave me a date when she will send me "5 long emails". But then subsequent miscommunications happened prior to that date and she never ended up sending me these emails.



I think you probably didn't read my previous answer to your question of whether or not I showed Anne affection. Because actually my answer was that I did NOT show her any affection, and I further explained that I was simply un-prepared to do it and due to Asperger my responses are too slow.

On any event the point is that she didn't mention anything about affection in this letter. So this is irrelevent.



But there are other people in these aspi message board venting about the way NT-s mind works. They don't have to know it either, but they can still talk about it because that is what the board is for.