I want to get a rough idea... Aspie males please enter!

Post Reply New Topic

After browsing the love forum for a short while, I noticed a few things. There are some rather deprived guys blaming female frigidity for "forced celebacy", and there are some rather insensitive females telling these guys that "sex is a privelage, not a right" and disregarding the males' suffering.

Now, without getting into who's right or who's wrong... Naturally, females have no way of knowing just how unpleasant it is for a male to be deprived of sex, because the sex drive (and the experience of it being stifled) is not the same for males as it is for females, so they can't understand the suffering or be expected to sympathize... AND, just as naturally, males cannot be expected to understand female standards without great difficulty, but they should be able to understand that there is no reason whatsoever for a female to submit her body to a thoroughly unappealing male simply because the male claims to be "suffering". Acceptable mates are judged by their adequacy, not by the amount of discomfort they are in. That is something which both genders can understand on some level or another, if they try.

So please don't argue about who you personally think is right or wrong here. I'm only interested in numbers, not subjective opinions, as I will explain.

ANYWAY, to get to the point... After seeing this little war going on, with neither side showing the capacity to understand the position of the other, I began wondering... Between the aspie males with mates and children, and the aspie males with no mates or children (not including the impotent, sorry) which category do you fit in, and what is your annual income or your level of employment?

(Females are welcome to state the status of their mate, but those without mates don't really have any basis on which to give a factual reply, sorry)

Don't worry girls, I'm not calling you gold-diggers, far from it, but it stands to reason that those who are more capable of providing for offspring (and those who have a "personality" which shows that they take seriously the need to be able to do so) would appear as more adequate (and thus more suitable) mates, and I would expect that you could not reasonably disagree, without challenging this assumption on the generic and ambiguous claim of "sexism" rather than challenging the expectation with any actual evidence or addressing any points specifically... But then that is the whole point of asking this question! To cast my expectations aside and get to the real facts, so don't get the wrong idea.

Are the aspies who can provide for a family considered more attractive mates, or is it going to turn out bizarrely that the "deadbeat bum" aspies are the true "players"?

Perhaps after we gather these statistics, the males may realise why they should stop complaining and expecting everything to be handed to them on a plate for free, and perhaps that they should work harder to achieve something in life. But, of course, there is also the possibility that we will find the opposite result, and that those who make the most effort to be all that they can be are actually being unfairly treated like beggars when they are infact the people who are furthest from "begging".

(There are far too many people in this world who are incapable of rational thought, so I am not going to respond or attempt to reason with anyone who makes the claim "sexism" in response to this thread. I am only interested in what the numbers will reveal as factual, regardless of which direction they point in, and quantitive measurement is about as far from blind prejudice as you can possibly get.)

Last edited by Invader on 20 Sep 2010, 2:18 am, edited 3 times in total.

It is my wager that the men with AS who have found mates differ from the men with AS who have not found mates in these areas...

1. Men with AS who have found mates may generally be older and thus have had more time to find them.

2. Men with AS who have found mates may have more capacity for self reflection and self improvement.

3. Men with AS who have found mates did not resign themselves to self defeatism.

4. Men with AS who have found mates did not perceive women as an enemy.

5. Men with AS who found mates may have just been lucky.

6. Men with AS who found mates may have just been more persistent.

Being a scientist, I fully appreciate the extra criteria you have added and understand how they may influence results outside of the visible answers to the basic "are you a capable provider or not" question. I'm not trying to scientifically prove beyond all doubt that being motivated to acquire wealth is a factor which will secure a mate (although the majority of scientists, as unscrupulous as they are, would gladly use the forthcoming results to do so)... My intention is merely to (hopefully) get across the point that if a male wants to mate, he has to try harder.

I may well be proved wrong, if the numbers show that the factors you have presented play a more significant role. But maybe not! And that's a chance worth taking if it ends up encouraging someone to actually try harder, rather than expecting everything to be handed to them just because they're suffering. Of course they have been told blatantly that they must "try harder" by females (good for you, aspie girls, for being so blunt and direct! NT girls aren't so straightforward and honest, they believe adequate males figure this out for themselves. ) but the fact that they already resent females to a certain degree makes these unfortunate males less willing to take these females' advice, and are more prone to see them as "selfish b..ches"... I believe that if these males are encouraged to find these things out for themselves, from sources which they are less likely to be bitter towards, there is a chance that these aspies might actually figure out how they can increase their chances of reproducing.

They see women as "selfish b..ches" because they don't understand that women are supposed to desire "capable" males. Men value physical beauty, females value tenacity and ability. This is how it's supposed to be, and it is wrong to believe that women are in the wrong for valuing what they value. These naive aspie males need to learn to appreciate the female desire for an adequate mate, and learn that whining like a baby is not the answer! And it seems like they'd be more likely to learn it from numerical evidence, rather than from the opinions of people who they already believe are "wrong".

I'd like to see more motivated aspies having the kids that they deserve, rather than having their genes disappear just because they got the wrong idea of what males are supposed to do...

At least I hope that the numbers will rationally show them that they should value perseverance and try harder... If they end up showing the opposite then I'll hand the advice-giving over to you, and take a vacation in the nuthouse.


OOPS... I'm not supposed to state my motives so openly and honestly! Damn you, aspergers!

I think this subject can be addressed from three legitimate angles.

1. Sociological Programming: Culture has a significant impact on who we choose to date. As the media continues to put emphasis on charming rich guys, athletes, and 'bad boys', a lot of guys who are really better choices may get ignored because of peer pressure.

2. Bullying and Biology: I don't think we can ignore the effect of poor self-esteem on your ability to get a date. From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes sense to avoid someone with poor self-image. That poor self-image is the result of successful bullying, and it allows them to weed out competition.

3. Personal Responsibility: This angle is never the entire picture, but it also can't be rejected. I have no sympathy for a guy who never showers, doesn't take care of his body, and then complains about how lonely he is. It helps to actually be a halfway decent person.

In Summation
I don't think there are many cases where one person or group can hold all the blame. On some level, you can blame women and the media. On some level, you can blame the people who made your life hell. On some level, you have responsibility to be a halfway decent person.

Instead of trying to find a scape-goat, it might help to accept that this is a subject in which very few people, if any, are truly innocent of making this worse.

OK, it seems people are missing the point here. I specifically want to avoid the placement of blame, as the placement of blame usually stems from nothing but resentment and the desire to place responsibility on others for your own misfortune. All of your points have their basis in the minds of human beings and their own desires, first and foremost, so I do not consider them to be relevant factors in relation to the question. The media only promotes that which they already know has mass appeal, etc. Otherwise they would go bankrupt. These societal norms are not "causes" in themselves, they are effects of the underlying condition of the human animal and the demands which its urges communally place upon the world. Norms don't magically come from nowhere, they come from people and what people want, whether the occasional individual disagrees with the majority or not. That same individual may condemn the human fascination with beauty, simply because they are resentful of the rejection they experience due to their own ugliness, but that ugly individual will (9 times out of 10) also reject an equally ugly person, rendering their hypocritical opinion worthless, as far as a rational dissection of the situation goes.

An aspie male without a mate could arbitrarily place the blame on an infinite number of factors, anything at all to try and ignore the part they have played in their own lack of success. I want to stay clear of this kind of arbitrary qualititive judgement and stick with what can be empirically proven.

I'm only looking for numbers here. The number of aspie males with mates or children, versus the number of aspie males without mates or children, and their annual incomes or levels of employent, which can be taken as a measure of adequacy to provide for offspring, which is ultimately what mating is about.

With these numbers we can take a slightly more accurate guess at the reasons why they are without mates, rather than making arbitrary and subjective assumptions with no basis but a person's own desire to place blame.

No one answered Invader's question, which is too bad because I would like to see the results. Here are my answers:

I am married with kids. My income varies greatly since most of it is investment income, but over the last 10 years averages over $500K per year. My wife is Mexican. I do consider American women to be my enemy and I could never have gotten an American wife.

I too would like to know if there is any correlation between a male aspie/autie's income/employment status and the likelihood of their having a girlfriend. I have no idea if there is one or not, and no fixed opinion on the subject either.

In fact I'm so interested in your question; Invader, that I'm going to start a new thread with a poll attached in order to gather data as quickly and concisely as possible! :lol I hope that lots of people will vote on it.

PS. I will link it here once I've set it up. ... http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt138298.html
.

Last edited by ouinon on 20 Sep 2010, 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

The poll should distinguish between having a girlfriend/wife from a feminist versus a non-feminist culture because the point of the poll is to see which men can attract women in their local feminist countries.

Astrology astrology astrology.............and parents attitudes

Pretty Girls Make Graves The Smiths Lyrics

Upon the sand, upon the bay
"There is a quick and easy way" you say
Before you illustrate
I'd rather state :
"I'm not the man you think I am
I'm not the man you think I am"

And Sorrow's native son
He will not smile for anyone

And Pretty Girls Make Graves
Oh ...

End of the pier, end of the bay
You tug my arm, and say : "Give in to lust,
Give up to lust, oh heaven knows we'll
Soon be dust ... "

Oh, I'm not the man you think I am
I'm not the man you think I am

And Sorrow's native son
He will not rise for anyone

And Pretty Girls Make Graves
Oh really ?
Oh ...

I could have been wild and I could have
Been free
But Nature played this trick on me

She wants it Now
And she will not wait
But she's too rough
And I'm too delicate

Then, on the sand
Another man, he takes her hand
A smile lights up her stupid face
(and well, it would)

I lost my faith in Womanhood
I lost my faith in Womanhood
I lost my faith ...


Whining bloody Morrissey!!
Oh

It would be interesting to see if there is any difference between the experience of men in different cultures/societies, but a poll to see if income levels correlate in any way with sexual success, with even the most basic variables, is already pretty length/complicated, so I have not included that factor, sorry.
.

Could I ask where students come to the question? thats if they are supposed to, which im going to guess they're not (i may have missed something somewhere in your post so apologies).

But anyway for what its worth my income is roughly 0 (not including student loans etc) and I am not married, have no partner and i have no kids......at least none im aware of! lol

Only a math and a science exam away from going to College, but with my extreme ADD, it's useless anyway.
I've accepted that all women actually look for is an elite sperm donor, so I don't bother with women.

i think its incorrect to assume that even if there is a correlation between income level and relationship status, that it is caused solely by the income itself.

a man who has a job is going to be exposed to more people, and therefore more potential mates, than one who doesnt. this is especially true in a population that doesnt seek social encounters. he also has the financial means to go places and do things, again more exposure than a man without income. and he also has the financial ability to invite someone to do something with him, besides just hang in his room at his parents house which doesnt make a very good first, or second or third, date.

i also think the entire question shows a heavy bias towards stereotyped gender roles. why not ask the women the same questions? unless of course you are not doing so on the assumption that a woman chooses a mate based on their ability to support a family while a man does not.

the whole question to me seems like a wasted effort tho. most people are going to agree that a person who has a job and supports themselves is going to make a better candidate for romantic partner. i highly doubt a lot of people want to take on the financial responsibility for another adult, especially not if the plan is to have children and raise a family with that partner.

In the interests of the OP's request, here are my stats:

Have girlfriend for over 4 years, no kids.
Current income: 38,420/year.
Income when we became a couple (not including overtime) $25,000.

That said, the hypothesis, that aspie men with money are more successful in attracting women, even if true, would not necessarily conclude that the only way aspie men can get women is to be rich. There are many examples of aspies on this forum who, for whatever reason, cannot get or keep a job. I'd say that the skills that lets one deal with the stress of a 9-5, 40 hour/week job are closely related to the skills that lets one get, and keep, a mate.

The attitudes of being serious and working constantly to support children do not in any way automatically suggest good parenting skills. The adults who I lived with are proof of that. That is really all I can call them because they weren't parents at all by any stretch of the imagination. All that attitude does is suggest everything is about money.

Girls go after men/women with money because they are in fact materialistic gold diggers. And most guys only want hot girls so they can brag about doing a hot chick to their "boys." The majority of both genders are shallow selfish asses. That is the essence of the aspie problem in being unable to fit in or understand that character type. At least for me. Anyone else?

i removed myself from that world. i simply don't see the point in choosing a mate based on crap like that. after all, both finances and beauty are transient criteria. money and good looks change over a person's lifetime, so basing mate choice on things like that is rather short-sighted and shallow.

but based on my own experiences, i don't buy that people are single just because of physical or financial deficits. i think they are single because of a combination of factors, including their own self-esteem. perhaps if people internalize their own worth according to silly standards like that, they consider themselves unworthy mates and hamstring their own possibilities.