Question for the Aspie males that want girlfriends.

Post Reply New Topic

Years ago, I came to the conclusion that people who liked the Simpsons and South Park had much higher sex drives and were more likely to be into kink that people who didn't like those shows.

How? Does the Simpsons engorge your genitals or something? Thats silly.

Last edited by hale_bopp on 24 Feb 2010, 11:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

so the only people that are fornicating watch the simpons and south park?

Correlation does not imply causation. You could find someone that likes those shows and has a low-to-nonexistent sex drive (I'm an example of that), or someone who hates those shows but is a nymphomaniac...

Also, if I say "I am looking for a partner who likes oral sex, fetishes, and fornication", without mentioning the Simpsons and South Park (or anything else for that matter), people will think I am a creepy pervert.

You've said this several times before - instead can you answer the questions presented?

How do people who like these shows have a higher sex drive? I can see how people who like these shows are guarenteed to be sexually open as the shows are pretty sexual comedy, but what has that got to do with sex drive?

The link is that evangelical Christian fundamentalists are repulsed by both things.

I would drop the Simpsons and South Park criteria if there was a way to describe what I want in a partner in terms of sex drive and kink, without them thinking I just want sex and nothing else.

So basically you're pretending to be someone you're not by trying to convince people you're interested in the shows but really you only care about sex.

Why dont you just advertise on a dating site what you actually want? You may miss out on some people who dont like those shows who fit your needs if you insist on south park etc

Women on dating sites aren't looking for casual sex, and if they were, they have their choice of any guy they want. Maybe Tim feels he has to pretend he wants something more than sex because of this.

Am I the only one who doesn't see this as the ultimate derail?

I do want an actual relationship, where the partner is caring, understanding, and fun to be with. But I would also like to be sexually compatible with that person. That's the issue I am concerned about, because I have a very high sex drive, and would need a partner who is like that as well.

Fun to be with women want a partner who is fun to be with.

Are you saying I'm not fun to be with?

I am a completely different person IRL than I am on here.

I'm just judging by your posts. You're always negative and seem to be resentful and bitter.

Better late than never.

I thought the 'wingmen' metaphor was also popular one.

In some species of birds juvenile and less dominant males band together in order to increase their chances of mating.

Classic example is ducks such mallards and 'rape flights'. I'm not insinuating that wingmen in general are out to rape, I'm just talking about mallards, other species males can cooperate in different ways. Anyway with mallards things can get a bit confused, sometime males will chase down other males and attempt to mate with them, there is a documented example of a male chasing another male, which then flew into a building and died and then the male attempted to mate with the corpse.




Actually people do get confused about this more than you may think in my experience, I don't see why you should ignore logical leaps. Surface logic is very common. Critical thinking may be improved, but not everyone has a natural motivation for it. One person was convinced that families were the same as packs. So reminding, or introducing the subject an supporting information is important.


Again people still take it literally.



I could have phrased a lot better, but any even we will go with 'Nice guy fallacy'. Very simplistically if you want to boil down the reason why anyone does anything from a neurological standpoint you could think of it as stimulus->response. In other words, a particular stimulus, whether from an external input or not, is going to produce some (or no) response in the brain. So with that in mind sometimes you get the same sort brain activity in different people for different stimulus. I read about some tests, where they had gambling addicts and those that enjoyed giving a lot of money to charity, etc. When they scanned them with fMRI doing their favourite activity the same pleasure centres of the brain would light up.

So to put it bluntly it could have floated Mother Teresa’s boat the help out the poor in Calcutta (yes I know there is some controversy as to whether she was actually about helping them but regardless). It is not everyone’s cup of tea. In any event, if for the sake of argument someone wants to be treated nicely at a point in time, well that is because it floats their boat, and it might float the boat of the person doing it. None of this is fixed though, someone may require totally different types of stimulus to create interest.

What is common is you get people saying things like “I’m a nice guy, but I don’t go no girlfriend”. Well really there is more to it that just being nice, and how do they know if their idea of nice matches up with what would stimulate a potential partner? If you are focussing on being nice, there isn’t necessarily anything that makes you naturally better than the average person, and worse if you believe it is all about what is righteous then how do you justify your moral blindness and cynicism of your human self.

You may get called a nice guy at some point in your life. This could be for a whole magnitude of reasons and it may or may not stand in the context that you are thinking about it. Also you might get several people agreeing that X is a nice guy. This may or may not have any baring on his love life.

It is not classical romanticism but it is kind of awesome that two (maybe more), can create that ‘loving’ feeling inside, thus serving each others interest interests in the process (in a ‘nice’ way )



Well I have given my opinion thus far. Emotion is inevitably going to creep in. Even though I am somewhat blunted, I not free from it. You can but try.


Actually I am saying something other than that, which is people are at difficulty attempting to asses human behaviour from an objective standpoint. It is not perfect when studying other animals either, but it is particularly challenging for us to look at ourselves from the outside. It is still a problem whether it involves and emotionally charged discussion or not. It is so, easy to taint things with our perception of ourselves.

What is coming out of neurology in recent years is that our sense of self looks to be a very top level abstraction. We tend to think like ‘I behaved like X because…’ but actually there is no reason why a particular behaviour has to have dialogue in line with your conscious thoughts, which, is why a person’s behaviour can directly contradict how they think about it. It sounds complicated and it is, but think about the simpler things like hormones, it is well established that they can change your mood and behaviour. In conclusion individualism is important but it isn't the only factor.