Do women simply just dislike Aspie men?

Post Reply New Topic

One other advice is to avoid online interactions. It's easier for a girl to dismiss your feelings when they are online. Discard/throw you away. Much harder face to face (they have to make an effort).

Meeting girls face to face is much more rewarding and like a good fisherman move to where the fish are....if you live somewhere where there's no fish biting then move to where there are more fish,

Actually, I see a big lack of 'checklist' logic among guys in general; and I always thought this is a problem, there are plenty of guys who end up in abusive/horrible relationships because they went for one just because she's the only one who said yes.

On the contrary, I think guys, all guys not just aspies, must also make checklists.

Guys must also learn how to become picky; and to express what are their red flags with no remorse; women do it all the time.

^^ But most women won't know that that aspie is an aspie, or do you mean the typical aspie traits even without knowing that it has a name?

You have to go around in life emphasizing to other people that you have worth and you are a viable person.

Just because you might be “Aspie,” “autistic,” or whatever doesn’t lessen the fact that you can be as useful, or more useful, than an NT person with the “usual” interests. You are not “less” than the NT person.

Just like one shouldn’t discuss anime with a woman, a woman should necessarily talk about the intricacies of applying makeup. Both interests just might bore listeners.

Females are people, too.

Why can’t you converse with females like you would converse with males (for most topics).

Once you can do that, without seeing females as something otherworldly, you will go farther in your quest for a relationship.

Some women even like discussing sports!

If you go to a place like Bend, Oregon, I am certain that most women there couldn’t truthfully talk about traveling to too many foreign places.

I'm not convinced that the struggles many posters describe is an 'aspie men' issue and instead an 'adult children' thing. Now, I don't use that term to be judgmental since my entire period as a thirty-something I've absolutely qualified as one of these myself, including even when I was involved with someone. The fact that I was able to make something work for much of that period is likely an outlier.

If you're well into adulthood, live with your parents and still accept a clear parent/child dynamic; have no plans, hopes or prospects of altering that situation and don't understand why others might not understand this, this will likely make you a far less appealing partner to adults. These traits are also likely to impact your platonic relationships, so the relationship between no friends and no sigoth is still relevant, but previously the understanding I've advanced didn't account for folks who had more social success early in life. This factor will mean more during one's 20s through 40s than it might later on, and certainly more than it did when one is still teenaged or in their early 20s.

Basically, the social deficits will harm one, same with toxic attitudes and all of the other things that have come up in this and other similar threads, but at the end of the day, if potential partners are left with the impression that you're basically a child and not a full participant in their world, you're unlikely to be concerned as a serious prospect for a relationship and might need to be really appealing to even be considered for a fling. Given that that's where we're often starting from, even if all of the factors that might improve ones hope for even short-term romantic success (you're an attractive, charismatic woman interested in average looking guys for a hook-up, fluent in using social media and apps, with sufficient free time and budget, etc) you still might have less success than average, so for those of us who are male, or at least not pursuing straight males, less attractive, less charming, too busy, less fluent in 'dating technology' etc, each of those negatives gets compounded by this primary one.

Most of what the more positive advisors is suggesting is true, but we've often failed to weigh this factor adequately.

This is one of the primary factors that makes the more negative advisors appear true, although I don't agree with the idea that it's utterly hopeless I don't disagree with the idea that it will often appear that way. I don't believe they've been correct in attributing the problem, although I'm sure someone's brought up the same idea that I am before. I don't believe that it's insurmountable, but it is a substantial complicating factor especially given that it often seems as though some posters on here also select against their fellow adult children without really acknowledging it. Obviously if that's the boat you're in, your shipmates might be both more suitable as partners as well as able to sympathize with the experience.

It does seem as though more of the women in this boat might use that knowledge to not bother with considering relationships which seems to make them less prone to complaining about the situation (no idea if that's actually healthier than posting about it regularly, even if it appears to be).

Anyways, that's my borderline incoherent rambling for the hour.

Just saying....

Women are still expected to be the caretakers and the nurturers. They may not be attracted to men that will add to their burden of people they have to take care of.

I've been friends with people who are at a much lower socio-economic status than me, and it always ended up that I had to pay their way. In the end, married men live longer than single men, and married women drop dead sooner than single women.

A woman I conversed with on Reddit said, "I look for assets, not liabilities." Maybe more men are willing to support poor women, but women are not willing to support poor men who have nothing going on in their lives.