# Why did that girl lose interest



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

So I met a certain girl on a dating site, and I had with her the following conversation:



> ME: Congrats on graduation! What is your major?
> HER: Oh it's such a sad major! Ugh! Psych and criminology. What brings you to Albuquerque?
> ME:Sad and fun at the same time I guess  I came here to do ph.d. in math.
> HER:Why Albuquerque, though? I'm (Name), by the way.
> ...


Then we talked on the phone for 4 hours. In this conversation I DID talk about my Asperger and isolation, as you might guess, but I wasn't as self focused as I usually am: like for example she also had a chance to tell me about her depression (I don't remember if it was depression or bipolar) and her own loneliness. Also we talked about other stuff like her having a cabin in the woods and my having a dream of having that kind of cabin thats also a car: even though thats not what she has (her cabin can't move) she could relate to that dream. I told her how one of my ex-s was sleep walking, and she told me she was sleep walking too. She also told me about her ex who had criminal record and cheated on her. But then towards the end of the conversation I mentioned to her how I don't believe in sex before marriage and she told me how frustrated she is with some of the guys that are only after sex -- and she said it in a way as to give me a compliment -- but then I mentioned to her how it bothers me that I am being blamed for things other guys do. Then 5 minutes later she ended the conversation, which I guess in itself won't be bad since we talked for few hours and it was evening and I was sort of waiting for her to end it since I didn't have guts to end it myself. But what bothered me is that when she was saying good night she said I should TEXT her tomorrow which made me wonder whether she was implying she doesn't want to call me or whether I read too much into it. Right after convo was over she asked me to send her a pic with a smile but I couldn't really smile despite trying to so I sent her non-smily pic. Then she didn't respond to my goodmorning and then in the afternoon we had the following conversation:



> ME 17:38 Did you lose interest? I have two clues that you did. One is taht you asked me to text you today rather than call and the second one is that you didn't reply to my text when I did. If so, tat would probably be due to Asperger: namely, I probably said something wrong without realizing it. I guess I said something wrong at the end of the conversation since the conversation went pretty well prior to that. Either that ore else you didn't like that I didn't really smile on that pic despite the fact that you asked me to. But then again you asked me to text rather than call shortly before the pic thing so I am guessing I said something wrong, too, and pic just made it worse. Anyway, can you tell me what I said?
> HER 17:40 Haha no. I'm sorry. You text me while I was at work and I'm not even allowed my phone in the building. I didn't mean to leave you hanging
> HER 17:40 How's it going?
> ME 17:41 I am sitting at a tutoring table. No one shows up but I am supposed to still be here from 4 to 6 so I am here just in case
> ...


Long story short: its been over a week and I never heard from her.


----------



## SparklingWater (Jan 16, 2013)

This is why the common advice is to have a life of your own and your own stuff going on. In MY opinion you seem far too desperate and clingy. People have lives and generally are unwilling to drop everything for a new not even relationship. A flirtation. First few conversations. She's just getting to know you and you're too overeager. People have plenty of conversations like this but with your SA you're pinning all your hopes and interest on her. Also this is just my glancing opinion. I did not read all that


----------



## TheInvisibleHand (Sep 5, 2015)

Pretty sure you are not the only one she talks to, and lets face its its not same way around .


----------



## Ominous Indeed (Sep 6, 2015)

I read everything down to this. Maybe I will read the rest later, but I have feeling you are starting to go down a path you should not be going down. 

"E 17:38 Did you lose interest? I have two clues that you did. One is taht you asked me to text you today rather than call and the second one is that you didn't reply to my text when I did. If so, tat would probably be due to Asperger: namely, I probably said something wrong without realizing it. I guess I said something wrong at the end of the conversation since the conversation went pretty well prior to that. Either that ore else you didn't like that I didn't really smile on that pic despite the fact that you asked me to. But then again you asked me to text rather than call shortly before the pic thing so I am guessing I said something wrong, too, and pic just made it worse. Anyway, can you tell me what I said? "


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

Two suggestions on why she hasn't responded that could be your fault (there could also be reasons that are nothing to do with you):

1. Your replies seem desperate and you place too much blame on your Aspergers for your behaviour. People have things to do, and the fact that they don't reply immediately is natural. If you haven't set up an actual time to talk online, I would suggest wait 24 hours after your first message to nudge them with another. If they don't reply to that one, they're probably not interested. But don't bombard them with messages psychoanalysing their behaviour based on one interaction and your assumed flaws.

2. You don't really care what she's talking about; this was a week ago and you can't remember if she has depression or is bipolar? Not a good sign, man.


----------



## Were (Oct 16, 2006)

after 17:46, you should have just asked her how her day was, Why do you have to go and make things so complicated?


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

Why did you send "17:38?"


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

Personally i think you lost her when she said "you're full of information, thanks for telling me". She just wanted to know if you had a job or not.

On a positive note, you did at least get that far. A lot of dudes dont get replies at all on dating sites so youre doing something right at getting peoples attention. You just gotta learn how to just dial it back and just have fun with people. Even if you have flaws, if youre at least fun to be around that may win some people over.


----------



## PumpkinCheesecake (Jan 19, 2017)

realisticandhopeful said:


> This is why the common advice is to have a life of your own and your own stuff going on. In MY opinion you seem far too desperate and clingy. People have lives and generally are unwilling to drop everything for a new not even relationship. A flirtation. First few conversations. She's just getting to know you and you're too overeager. People have plenty of conversations like this but with your SA you're pinning all your hopes and interest on her. Also this is just my glancing opinion. I did not read all that


Thissssssssss. I've been guilty of doing this in the past. Focus on yourself and good things will happen.


----------



## Zatch (Apr 28, 2013)

PumpkinCheesecake said:


> Focus on yourself and good things will happen.


Amen to that. Be good to yourself.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Neal said:


> Personally i think you lost her when she said "you're full of information, thanks for telling me". She just wanted to know if you had a job or not.


But then how would you explain why, after telling me what you just quoted, she also said she wants to talk about more than just that. And, besides that, during the entirety of the four hour phone conversation the academic topics never came up. If that was truly her only goal, why wouldn't she find a way to get around to that subject?

And here is a separate question. The way you phrased it, it almost seems to imply that academics is the reason she lost her interest. That reminds me of the common concept that being "friends" is a turnoff too, which always puzzled me as well: shouldn't the relationship be built on friendship? And, similarly, shouldn't the relationship be built on common interests (such as academic, for example)? Or are you saying that women are wired in a way that if I am "too much" of something (be it a "friend" or an "academic") then they think I am undatable? When I ask people on campus why people don't talk to me one common thing I hear is "you are always with the book" (referring to my habbit of doing math/physics homework in caffeteria and other public places). So is studying too much and/or talking about school too soon a turnoff? Perhaps stereotypes of Sheldon from Big Bang Theory feed this sort of misconception?


----------



## Virgo (Jun 27, 2016)

Look, I really feel for you, because you have Aspergers and all, so... I do honestly believe it is really impossible for you to see what you did wrong, for you to understand social norms, etc... Trust me I really feel for you. I'll try to help anyway though but let me just be clear you f'ed up SOOOOO bad dude. Like really bad.

First - "ME: (Telling her as to why I chose this school; I erased it from this post since it said I went over 10000 count)"

WHAT?! Are you kidding me? Your 2nd or 3rd message in and you are talking about yourself that much already? She must be a really really nice girl to keep talking to you, I thought, but I didn't think that was the absolute worst thing. And I wasn't TOO surprised she asked for your number.

Okay so you talk on the phone for 4 hours. Literally nothing wrong with that bit. People do that.

But okay let me tell you the reason she wanted you to text her "instead" of call.

I'm not implying you don't have a busy life or anything, but do you truly understand how absurd it is to expect someone to talk on the phone 4 hours a day with someone? Or even for like 30 minutes? Unless they are your gf/bf? But there was nothing to it, her asking you to text her. That was a GOOD sign. That's a totally normal thing for a person to say. She didn't even THINK that deep into it. You took this way out of proportion. It doesn't matter that she said "text" or "call", the fact is, she is inviting you to talk to her more. It was so, so simple.

But then in the second script do I even need to explain how weird and bizarre your messages were? Do I really really have to? That would make this post very long.

Only reason she cut you off, and she did, if she was a sane person: you come across as very desperate and paranoid. You are seemingly obsessed with her already. It's weird. You're practically INVESTIGATING her, like someone else said you are trying to psychoanalyze her. That is not impressive, it is very weird and uncomforting.

Nothing to do with HER depression/bipolar problems. Nothing to do with some girl you mentioned or whatever (why the ef would she care?) Nothing to do with a 4 hour convo or anything. It's because you are very pushy, paranoid, emotionally unstable, and annoying. I am so sorry. I'm sure you're not really that bad in reality, but to put it bluntly, you really came off that way.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> If you haven't set up an actual time to talk online, I would suggest wait 24 hours after your first message to nudge them with another.


I forgot to mention it in my OP, but that conversation when I was freaking out over her not replying right away was over text, not online. To sum it up, what happened was

a) Conversation online (first quoted text)
b) Four hour conversation over the phone 
c) Conversation over the text next day (second quoted text)



TheWelshOne said:


> You don't really care what she's talking about; this was a week ago and you can't remember if she has depression or is bipolar? Not a good sign, man.


This might actually be onto something since this is the feedback I am getting from A LOT of people. I guess my question in this particular case is this: she is not a mind reader. The way most people know I am self focused is that most of what I say is always about myself. But in case of this girl like I said I tried to split it evenly. So are you saying there are some other clues that I am focused on myself? Obviously she hasn't tested me on whether I remember whether she has bipolar or depression. So are you saying there are something else that would give it away?


----------



## SparklingWater (Jan 16, 2013)

@causalset

i think your anxiety along with your analytical mind is wreaking havoc. take a deep breathe and stop overthinking and analyzing every little possibility. it's just too much. People aren't science projects to pick apart. There aren't answers to every question especially when human beings with feelings are involved. Feelings are the confounding variable.

I dated a Jamaican guy for years and it was a bad relationship. For the next couple of years Jamaican men, particularly the accent, were a complete turnoff. Were Jamaican guys who hit on me doing something wrong technically? No. But b/c of my feelings I wasn't into it. You need to focus on yourself. Analyzing others will get you nowhere i promise. 7 billion of us, all with dif thoughts and feelings. Learn yourself and then you'll be on the right track.


----------



## Destormjanina1 (Jan 9, 2017)

Too desperate dude


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> Nothing to do with HER depression/bipolar problems.


The reason I brought that one up is that the next day when I tried to get her attention again she told me that from time to time she would put the phone to a different room for the whole day in order to be by herself due to her social anxiety (I couldn't fit this part in due to 10000 letters limit). But I am not buying this: I mean its been over a week and I haven't heard from her. So to me it sounds like a "polite excuse" in order not to tell me the real reason such as I came across too pushy or what not.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

realisticandhopeful said:


> I dated a Jamaican guy for years and it was a bad relationship. For the next couple of years Jamaican men, particularly the accent, were a complete turnoff. Were Jamaican guys who hit on me doing something wrong technically? No. But b/c of my feelings I wasn't into it. You need to focus on yourself. Analyzing others will get you nowhere i promise. 7 billion of us, all with dif thoughts and feelings. Learn yourself and then you'll be on the right track.


Maybe what you just wrote has a clue actually. During our phone conversation she mentioned how the guy she was dating was constantly cheating on her. Now he did much worse things than just that, he was in jail and stuff. But in any case, since it also happened that he cheated, could it be that when I mentioned to her that woman I talked to it triggered something in her to think that I would cheat? I mean here is how it was weird. So yeah, people talk to strangers all the time. But why would I, in response to how was my day, just mention that one conversation with a stranger and nothing else? That seems a bit odd. And then when I subsequently got paranoid about it, wouldn't this imply that I have something to hide? Once again maybe in case of other women they wouldn't think that way. But since she was cheated on do you think she might -- just like you don't like Jamaican guys due to bad experience with one?


----------



## Virgo (Jun 27, 2016)

causalset said:


> The reason I brought that one up is that the next day when I tried to get her attention again she told me that from time to time she would put the phone to a different room for the whole day in order to be by herself due to her social anxiety (I couldn't fit this part in due to 10000 letters limit). But I am not buying this: I mean its been over a week and I haven't heard from her. So to me it sounds like a "polite excuse" in order not to tell me the real reason such as I came across too pushy or what not.


Yes, I think it is just a polite excuse. I mean I'm sure she DOES really do that, but you're right, there is more to it than that. I do not think you will get a message from her back, as she is indeed avoiding you, so I would move on. So sorry. Hope this thread helps and you can learn from this.

The 10000 letters was not all you? She messaged you in between that? You made it sound like you were writing a novel about yourself. Still, again, that wasn't the worst part of it all. Anyway good luck in the future.

P.S. Also I know it's tough, but she has zero responsibility to explain to you what you did wrong, I know it sucks, but the fact is she is already turned off... so I think she just wants the entire thing dropped. So I'd just learn from this.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> First - "ME: (Telling her as to why I chose this school; I erased it from this post since it said I went over 10000 count)"
> 
> WHAT?! Are you kidding me? Your 2nd or 3rd message in and you are talking about yourself that much already? She must be a really really nice girl to keep talking to you, I thought, but I didn't think that was the absolute worst thing. And I wasn't TOO surprised she asked for your number.


Actually that is what I usually do when I have conversation with people, online or offline. True, most people don't talk to me. But during rare occasions when they do, I just can't think of too many subjects to talk about. Do you think that might be why no one talks to me, since the few people they did told everyone else that school is all I ever talk about?

But in any case I DO want to talk about regular normal things. I just don't know how to master small talk. So I wish others could lead a small talk for me. I mean every time I overhear people having a conversation I can't help but feel jealous that I am not part of that conversation. One good thing about small talk is that it allows people to connect on emotional level without all this loud intellectual stuff being on its way. So you see, I understand it. I just can't master it -- just like I like listening to the music but I don't know how to play musical instruments. I wish people could understand that, beyond all this logical intellectual stuff there is a real human being with real desire to connect in NORMAL ways I just don't know HOW so I want them to guide me.


----------



## SparklingWater (Jan 16, 2013)

causalset said:


> Maybe what you just wrote has a clue actually. During our phone conversation she mentioned how the guy she was dating was constantly cheating on her. Now he did much worse things than just that, he was in jail and stuff. But in any case, since it also happened that he cheated, could it be that when I mentioned to her that woman I talked to it triggered something in her to think that I would cheat? I mean here is how it was weird. So yeah, people talk to strangers all the time. But why would I, in response to how was my day, just mention that one conversation with a stranger and nothing else? That seems a bit odd. And then when I subsequently got paranoid about it, wouldn't this imply that I have something to hide? Once again maybe in case of other women they wouldn't think that way. But since she was cheated on do you think she might -- just like you don't like Jamaican guys due to bad experience with one?


STOP all of this. Just stop analyzing her. This is why desperation is unattractive. You had one or 2 good convos with a girl and look at all this mess that has come from it. This is so unhealthy it's not funny. Focus on yourself. Get the help you need. You will scare off every girl until you get this behavior under control.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> Yes, I think it is just a polite excuse. I mean I'm sure she DOES really do that, but you're right, there is more to it than that. I do not think you will get a message from her back, as she is indeed avoiding you, so I would move on. So sorry. Hope this thread helps and you can learn from this.


What is the most frustrating thing is that the reason she avoids me is that there is something very simple she doesn't know. If only she were to know a certain simple thing she would make a totally different decision -- but she won't hear that simple thing since she avoids having to hear to what I have to say.

Here is the simple thing I want to communicate to her. The reason I act this way is that I have very little positive social experience and lots of experience with rejection. Very little social experience means that I really don't know things such as "when is it normal to talk about conversation with random stranger and when isn't it", "is it common for people to delay their reply to texts by few minutes", and so forth -- which is why I overthink/overanalyze all this. Lots of rejection experience means that I would read negatives. But there is a good news. And the good news is that, once I get to know the particular person, I WILL have a lot of experience with that person, so I won't be doing it for the duration of my relationship. Case in point: I had three long term relationships (first lasted 8 months and the last two lasted 2 years each). The first relationship is the only one where I kept overanalyzing things throughout the relationship -- and looking back I can tell that its because the girl had no respect for me and I shouldn't have been dating her anyway. But if I look at my other two relationships, I only had such overanalyzing things at the beginning but not later on. In case of the second relatinoship I was overanalyzing first couple of months; she was even writing me emails telling me that its a turnoff and that I shouldn't be doing it, but because she didn't walk away, this problem was over when two months was over. Yes we had other issues that broke us up -- particularly the conflict between her and my mom -- but the point is that my overanalyzing wasn't one of them. In case of the third relationship, the overanalyzing stopped even quicker: within just a couple of conversations. What she did was that she simply pretended not to notice my confrontational messages and sent me something positive instead (she was really easy going) and this solved the entire thing. And then once I knew her better I weren't overanalyzing her any more. Well to be honest I started overanalyzing things all over again during the last 4 months of the relationship but that was because she started to nitpick on various things I say/do which eventually lead to the breakup so of course I wanted to know what turned her off and how can I fix it.

Anyway I said it would be simple, it wasn't. But here is a simple summary of this. I am not that way when I am in a relationship. I am only that way during the first stages, so I wish she was more patient to stick around and see that I don't always have to be like that.



Atheism said:


> The 10000 letters was not all you? She messaged you in between that? You made it sound like you were writing a novel about yourself. Still, again, that wasn't the worst part of it all. Anyway good luck in the future.


I was referring to the robot on this forum that won't let my messages go thorugh if they are over 10000 letter count. So it has nothing to do with the subject of what I talk about since the robot doesn't know.


----------



## Virgo (Jun 27, 2016)

causalset said:


> What is the most frustrating thing is that the reason she avoids me is that there is something very simple she doesn't know. If only she were to know a certain simple thing *she would make a totally different decision* -- but she won't hear that simple thing since she avoids having to hear to what I have to say.
> 
> Here is the simple thing I want to communicate to her. The reason I act this way is that I have very little positive social experience and lots of experience with rejection. Very little social experience means that I really don't know things such as "when is it normal to talk about conversation with random stranger and when isn't it", "is it common for people to delay their reply to texts by few minutes", and so forth -- which is why I overthink/overanalyze all this. Lots of rejection experience means that I would read negatives. But there is a good news. And the good news is that, once I get to know the particular person, I WILL have a lot of experience with that person, so I won't be doing it for the duration of my relationship. Case in point: I had three long term relationships (first lasted 8 months and the last two lasted 2 years each). The first relationship is the only one where I kept overanalyzing things throughout the relationship -- and looking back I can tell that its because the girl had no respect for me and I shouldn't have been dating her anyway. But if I look at my other two relationships, I only had such overanalyzing things at the beginning but not later on. In case of the second relatinoship I was overanalyzing first couple of months; she was even writing me emails telling me that its a turnoff and that I shouldn't be doing it, but because she didn't walk away, this problem was over when two months was over. Yes we had other issues that broke us up -- particularly the conflict between her and my mom -- but the point is that my overanalyzing wasn't one of them. In case of the third relationship, the overanalyzing stopped even quicker: within just a couple of conversations. What she did was that she simply pretended not to notice my confrontational messages and sent me something positive instead (she was really easy going) and this solved the entire thing. And then once I knew her better I weren't overanalyzing her any more. Well to be honest I started overanalyzing things all over again during the last 4 months of the relationship but that was because she started to nitpick on various things I say/do which eventually lead to the breakup so of course I wanted to know what turned her off and how can I fix it.
> 
> ...


Well the thing is, I don't think she would make a different decision even if she knew. I think what is going to be the hardest thing for you is getting past that initial wall, and captivating someone. I believe you, that you say you eased up during your relationships. However, the way people process this is, if he is like this in the beginning, what gives me a reason to believe he won't be a disaster in a relationship? They just do not know how you are going to be later. No matter what your excuse is or what you tell/promise them. All you are providing them is this over-analyzing, paranoid personality and naturally they do not want to get involved. So I think you will truly win when you continue to practice and go through these things, and learn how people are through these experiences, and you need to not show people immediately that this is "who you are" if it is not.

It is not worth it for any person to gamble with that. I honestly do not blame her for not giving you a chance. You need to show people a different first impression.


----------



## SFC01 (Feb 10, 2016)

ffs, chill out on the lady front casualset


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> The 10000 letters was not all you? She messaged you in between that? You made it sound like you were writing a novel about yourself. Still, again, that wasn't the worst part of it all. Anyway good luck in the future.


Okay I see where the confusion is. I am not referring to the limit on the chat, I am referring to the limit on this forum. So 10000 letters is the sum of the letters of the entirety of my OP, *not* my reply to her question. Let me paste out the reply to her question so that you can see its exact length:


> HER: Why Albuquerque, though?I'm (name), by the way.
> ME: Okay to give you the background, I want to be a physicist, not mathematician. And I already have Ph.D. in Physics from Michgian. But I couldn't find a job so I decided to go back to school. Since doing another PHysics Ph.D. would be silly, I want to do "Math" Ph.D. but make it as close to physics as possible. THere are some math departments that have physicists in it but thats not common. Well New Mexico is one of such math departments: it has (name 1) and (name 2) that are in math departments yet do physics. But in any case they are not the real reason I came, the real reason is Professor (name 3) in Physics department who does EXACT kind of physics I am doing which is really rare since my type of physics is obscure. I actually wanted to collaborate with (name 3) back when I was doing first Ph.D. But he didn't want to, since I was in Michigan which for him was too far away. So I decided that maybe I can collaborate with him now and make it work out despite the fact that I will now be in math department and he is in physics. Thats why I sort of had my eye on New Mexico and then once I applied here and was admitted I found out about the people in math department that are extra bonus.My name is (name)


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> Well the thing is, I don't think she would make a different decision even if she knew.


and



Atheism said:


> However, the way people process this is, if he is like this in the beginning, what gives me a reason to believe he won't be a disaster in a relationship? They just do not know how you are going to be later.


So in the first quote you said "even if she knew" and in the second one you said that she "doesn't know". So what were you referring by "knowing" in the first quote that she doesn't know in the second? If, for example, she were to know that in my past relationships I acted exactly this way in the beginning but then calmed down later on, why wouldn't this knowlege help her? Or are you saying she might not believe what I have to say about my past relationships -- even though what happened in the past relationships is factual she might not believe I am telling the truth?

Also, wouldn't it "make sense" that its pretty common for people to be nervous at the beginning and calm down later on? Or, are you saying that, as common as it is, it is always coupled with people hiding it, and the fact that I don't hide it is what is uncommon? Ironically it means I am more honest than most, and honesty is usually considered a good thing. But are you saying people are so used to dishonesty (in a sense that people put a "good front" in the beginning to cover all their nervous thoughts) that when they see honesty they get scared and not know what to expect?


----------



## Virgo (Jun 27, 2016)

causalset said:


> Okay I see where the confusion is. I am not referring to the limit on the chat, I am referring to the limit on this forum. So 10000 letters is the sum of the letters of the entirety of my OP, *not* my reply to her question. Let me paste out the reply to her question so that you can see its exact length:


Ohhhhhhhh ok I get it.



causalset said:


> Actually that is what I usually do when I have conversation with people, online or offline. True, most people don't talk to me. But during rare occasions when they do, I just can't think of too many subjects to talk about. Do you think that might be why no one talks to me, since the few people they did told everyone else that school is all I ever talk about?
> 
> But in any case I DO want to talk about regular normal things. I just don't know how to master small talk. So I wish others could lead a small talk for me. I mean every time I overhear people having a conversation I can't help but feel jealous that I am not part of that conversation. One good thing about small talk is that it allows people to connect on emotional level without all this loud intellectual stuff being on its way. So you see, I understand it. I just can't master it -- just like I like listening to the music but I don't know how to play musical instruments. I wish people could understand that, beyond all this logical intellectual stuff there is a real human being with real desire to connect in NORMAL ways I just don't know HOW so I want them to guide me.


Yeah I can see why you would resort to that if small talk is hard for you. I remember small talk always being difficult for me. I only improved on it recently. When it is a matter of just not knowing what to say, that is tough. Ask them questions though. Try this.. if all you can think of is talking about yourself, just shift those thoughts to them instead. If you mention something you like to do, like a hobby or interest, follow up by asking if they like that too. But in general try to keep the things you say short, simple, and to the point when you are first chatting with someone. Do not be too overwhelming in any of your answers. Think of it like an "interview". I mean that's sort of what it is, in an incredibly crude sense, lol.


----------



## Virgo (Jun 27, 2016)

causalset said:


> and
> 
> So in the first quote you said "even if she knew" and in the second one you said that she "doesn't know". So what were you referring by "knowing" in the first quote that she doesn't know in the second? If, for example, she were to know that in my past relationships I acted exactly this way in the beginning but then calmed down later on, why wouldn't this knowlege help her? Or are you saying she might not believe what I have to say about my past relationships -- even though what happened in the past relationships is factual she might not believe I am telling the truth?
> 
> Also, wouldn't it "make sense" that its pretty common for people to be nervous at the beginning and calm down later on? Or, are you saying that, as common as it is, it is always coupled with people hiding it, and the fact that I don't hide it is what is uncommon? Ironically it means I am more honest than most, and honesty is usually considered a good thing. But are you saying people are so used to dishonesty (in a sense that people put a "good front" in the beginning to cover all their nervous thoughts) that when they see honesty they get scared and not know what to expect?


Well I also said "No matter what your excuse is or what you tell/promise them.", followed by "All you are providing them is this over-analyzing, paranoid personality and naturally they do not want to get involved."

So the correct speculation to that is -- them not believing you. No matter what you tell them. Actions speak louder than words. What gives them a _reason_ to believe you no matter what you say your past experiences are? And if they do not know you or your past life, this is not factual to them, no matter what you say. However, even if they do believe you, maybe they just do not want to go through that process when there are _plenty_ of other people who will _not_ drag them through that.

I'll go back to my weird job interview comparison. If you went to a job interview and told them I'm really slow and I have problems initially getting along with people, but give me roughly a year and I'll be normal? Why would they hire you? Okay I need to stop referring to job interviews now, lol. But yes, even if that were the complete and utter truth, they wouldn't hire you. People like AND dislike honesty for different reasons. But what's comparable about the job interview thing, is that in both scenarios, there are people out there who come without those problems. Period. There's no time necessary for them to grow, they just _have_ it. Problems that unfortunately you need to sort with yourself first before really being an eligible romantic companion. OR naturally, expect that it will be difficult. You had past relationships despite these problems. But I'm sure it was not easy.

Anyway. No it's actually not that common for someone to be that tense at first and then calm down. Usually people are already trusting and calm of each other when going into a relationship. So no, most people are not hiding anything.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> Yeah I can see why you would resort to that if small talk is hard for you. I remember small talk always being difficult for me. I only improved on it recently. When it is a matter of just not knowing what to say, that is tough. Ask them questions though. Try this.. if all you can think of is talking about yourself, just shift those thoughts to them instead. If you mention something you like to do, like a hobby or interest, follow up by asking if they like that too. But in general try to keep the things you say short, simple, and to the point when you are first chatting with someone. Do not be too overwhelming in any of your answers. Think of it like an "interview". I mean that's sort of what it is, in an incredibly crude sense, lol.


I guess it seems like a no win situation in a sense that what "most" people tell me is that my mistake is that I keep talking about myself, but then there are "select few" who tell me that my mistake is that when I ask people questions (about "them", not me) my questions are too "direct". So if its wrong to talk about myself and its wrong to talk about them, what should I do? I guess that is where "small talk" comes in, and thats the part I can't master.

On a positive side, though, I had one recent exchange that went well (well it was only one half a minute exchange but still) which I can compare to the other ones that didn't. So what happened was that I was in a physics class and right after that class one of the female students said something to the professor that sounded as if she wasn't in physics. So after we both left the room I asked her "so you are not in physics?" and she said she is in a computer science. We both walked out the building and she started to walk along the road, but I stopped waiting for cars to pass so that I can cross the road to go to my next class. But the good thing is that as she walked she turned around surprised that I weren't walking with her and said something equivalent to either bye or nice talking to you (don't remember which one). Normally people don't react to me so positively.

Now, I can compare it to a different conversation where I had negative reaction. So there were few times when I overheard people talking about something and then I would ask "what did you mean by such and such" and they would pretend not to hear me or not to understand my accent -- even though I simply repeated few of the words they just said! I was always wondering did they actually not understand my accent or did they just pretend not to in order to get away from me? In any case, if I compare the conversation I had with that girl to the conversation I had with them, I have a couple of clues:

1. The girl in the physics class looked closer to my age (I am 37 and she is possibly 30 I believe) while those other people were in their 20-s.

2. With the girl in the physics class we had something in common: we were in the same class while those other people were in caffeteria. Now I don't think this part is cure-all: I mean I actually "prefer" to talk to people that are in my classes as we have more things in common. The whole point is that they "don't" talk to me. But then again maybe we had another thing in common in that I was also from a different department (I was from math) and she knew it since professor kept mentioning it.

3. Maybe what helped is that I asked "so you are not in physics" as opposed to asking "_I overheard that you said such and such to the professor_ does it mean you are not in physics". Maybe what people didn't like in those other occasions is that I was listening in to their conversation (as evident from my quoting things they said -- which they pretended not to hear but they actually did hear it which is what put them off) whereas in case of this student yes I listen into her conversation too but she didn't know it: for all she knew I might have known she is from a different department from some other source?

Anyway what do you think?


----------



## Virgo (Jun 27, 2016)

causalset said:


> I guess it seems like a no win situation in a sense that what "most" people tell me is that my mistake is that I keep talking about myself, but then there are "select few" who tell me that my mistake is that when I ask people questions (about "them", not me) my questions are too "direct". So if its wrong to talk about myself and its wrong to talk about them, what should I do? I guess that is where "small talk" comes in, and thats the part I can't master.


Well no now there's a difference between asking someone a question too direct like "Why are you not responding to my messages? Is it A B or C?" and asking, like..... "Do you like puppies?" One is quite imposing, the other is rather innocent and tame.



causalset said:


> On a positive side, though, I had one recent exchange that went well (well it was only one half a minute exchange but still) which I can compare to the other ones that didn't. So what happened was that I was in a physics class and right after that class one of the female students said something to the professor that sounded as if she wasn't in physics. So after we both left the room I asked her "so you are not in physics?" and she said she is in a computer science. We both walked out the building and she started to walk along the road, but I stopped waiting for cars to pass so that I can cross the road to go to my next class. But the good thing is that as she walked she turned around surprised that I weren't walking with her and said something equivalent to either bye or nice talking to you (don't remember which one). Normally people don't react to me so positively.
> 
> Now, I can compare it to a different conversation where I had negative reaction. So there were few times when I overheard people talking about something and then I would ask "what did you mean by such and such" and they would pretend not to hear me or not to understand my accent -- even though I simply repeated few of the words they just said! I was always wondering did they actually not understand my accent or did they just pretend not to in order to get away from me? In any case, if I compare the conversation I had with that girl to the conversation I had with them, I have a couple of clues:
> 
> ...


Hmm wait I don't get the second (negative) scenario. Were you sitting in the cafeteria with these people already? These were not random people, right? Also it would be better to get a read on it if I knew what they were talking about and what you asked.

But yes I will agree that not admitting you are listening to a conversation sounds better than if you did. So in that case "So are you not in physics" definitely sounded better. Yeah you don't need to admit you were listening. I mean even if you were listening to a conversation, that does not always upset people. Some people don't even register it and won't get upset at all. Could depend what you are asking but I don't really know what was said in the cafeteria scene.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> So the correct speculation to that is -- them not believing you. No matter what you tell them. Actions speak louder than words.


But my words don't contradict my actions. What my words are saying is that "yes in the beginning I am like that but later on I am not". Since she never seen me later on, there are no "actions" that would contradict this.

Or are you saying that she doesn't believe that my words are honest because I only told her how I am like in the beginning after she saw it and I didn't tell her beforehand, which is what makes her think that when I do something else I will come up with something else I haven't told her? If I were to warn her ahead of time of things I might do, would she have been more forgiving?

I guess I can answer my own question that nope its not the case either. I have another example where I had perfectly good conversation with a girl up until I mentioned to her how everyone saw that I was smiling when I was texting her "and by the way I didn't thorw any temper tantrums either" and then she said "wait, you throw temper tantrums" and then it spiralled down. But perhaps its not a good example since I didn't actually tell her out of concern for her but it was more like I let my guard down and "was caught" making a slip of a tongue? So do you think she would have reacted better if BEFORE I ever made that "slip", I were to sit her down and tell her about my temper tantrums out of concern FOR HER: as in trying to warn her about it before she gets involved which, ironically, would have made it more likely that she would have agreed to look past it?

By the way there is also another problem: there were other girls that were put off by my merely mentioning Asperger. Do you think that my problem was that I mentioned it in the context of my being a victim as opposed to the context of being concern for them? Do you think if I were to mention Asperger in the context of worrying about THEIR needs they would have reacted better? I guess it is a bit hard to believe when it comes to the girls that assume that due to Asperger I am inherently incapable of caring about others. But do you think think that if I were to "worry about their well being in the context of my Asperger" this would nip that assumption in the bud?

I guess it is pretty hard to do though, because that is tantamount to admitting that I am toxic in some way which is the exact opposite to the message I am trying to communicate. But could that be a clue right there: that people that are willing to admit thery are toxic are the very ones who don't have to be stuck with that label -- which might actually touch upon why jerks are better off than nice guys when it comes to dating?



Atheism said:


> Anyway. No it's actually not that common for someone to be that tense at first and then calm down. Usually people are already trusting and calm of each other when going into a relationship. So no, most people are not hiding anything.


But if we take that small minority of people that ARE like that in the beginning, how are they statistically down the road? Are they MOSTLY the kind of people that do domestic violence and stuff, or are there people like me who are only this way in the beginning and then become normal?

In any case, one factor to keep in mind is that I have very limitted relationship experience: those three ex-s don't count since I am talking about experience of getting to know NEW people. So if you factor this into account, perhaps it wouldn't be as surprising any more why I react this way when it comes to new introductions.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Atheism said:


> Well no now there's a difference between asking someone a question too direct like "Why are you not responding to my messages? Is it A B or C?" and asking, like..... "Do you like puppies?" One is quite imposing, the other is rather innocent and tame.


The guy that told me about direct questions was the one who was leading the Bible study group (he gets along with me just fine, the reason he said is because I asked). So when I asked for the examples, the example he gave was that when we did the introductions, there was one guy from Japan, and I kept asking him how the houses look like in Japan, I was surprised he said they are really narrow and tall and so forth. So I guess its not confrontational since I didn't say I don't like them (on the contrary I am fascinated with how exotic countries look like) but I guess the questions did get repetitive -- which goes back to the question of how to do small talk: if I don't go deeper and deeper into the particular questions I would just run out of things to talk about.



Atheism said:


> Hmm wait I don't get the second (negative) scenario. Were you sitting in the cafeteria with these people already? These were not random people, right? Also it would be better to get a read on it if I knew what they were talking about and what you asked.
> 
> But yes I will agree that not admitting you are listening to a conversation sounds better than if you did. So in that case "So are you not in physics" definitely sounded better. Yeah you don't need to admit you were listening. I mean even if you were listening to a conversation, that does not always upset people. Some people don't even register it and won't get upset at all. Could depend what you are asking but I don't really know what was said in the cafeteria scene.


No, in caffeteria I weren't sitting with them. I was sitting on a different table, by myself, and i overheard them saying something. And yes they were strangers whom I didn't know. I believe in one of the cases they were talking about the movie. Incidentally, the reason I forgot to spell it out is that, other than a couple of times that don't really count, no one ever invites me anywhere, which brings up another question: why don't they?

Speaking of people I know, then there was a different example: not in caffeteria but in the classroom. One of the male students told a female student (who was sitting few tables away from him) that some drawing on something she was wearing (I believe it was a scarf but I am not completely sure) looked Indonesian rather than Chinese (it could have been the other way around -- even though those are my classmates I don't know their names, faces, and I wouldn't recognize them if I walk down the street). So like I said he was sitting few tables away from her, but they were both sitting in the back, I was sitting in the front and I turned around and asked the male student "what are you commenting on" and he pretended not to hear me; after I repeated few times and he heard, he gave me REALLY brief answer, and then he went right back to talking to her.

Then there was another example when in the class on how to teach math to first year college students, one female student mentioned how one good way to encourage students to learn logarithms is to tell them something interesting about them, such as the fact that kindergarden kids who don't know numbers instinctively perceive things in logarithmic terms. I asked her how is it possible and she seemed willing to answer and we had few minute back and forth about it, but then the instructor said that how toddlers perceive things isn't the topic; the topic is how it would encourage college students to listen, and it was a good point since it surely caught my interest, and I can ask further questions after class. So then, after class, I approached her with that same question (since she was friendly about it during the class, it was only instructor that stopped her, I thought she would be equally friendly after class) but nope she wasn't friendly any more: after pretending not to understand what I was asking she gave me a brief answer and told me to look it up. Of course I don't care about looking it up, I care about befriending her which was my real purpose and it obviously didn't work.

Could this be because it wasn't the first day of classes but rather she already knew me for few months as someone who never talks to anyone, whereas in case of the physics class there was no prior impression to overcome since most of my classes are math classes? On a more positive site, when I asked someone who runs that class about it he told me that maybe its because I didn't have an office (since I didn't teach last semester) so I didn't spend enough time with them to befriend me and now that I will have an office this semester (I just got one a week ago) they will grow to be more friendly towards me. But then again in physics department I don't have an office either (obviously: I am a math graduate student). So how come the girl in a physics class was more frienly towards me than the girl in the math class? So maybe the problem IS in fact that I made bad impression in math department (my version of the story) as opposed to my not spending enough time there (his version) and he was just distorting thing in order not to hurt my feelings?

As far as the female student who talked about logarithmic way of learning things (not to be confused with the one who talked about the scarf: the one that talked about hte scarf was Asian and the one that talked about logarithmic learning was European) there was another time at the very beginning of the semester that might have LOOKED LIKE she expressed interest and I blew her off. In particular, I asked her where were the mailboxes and instead of telling me she walked with me there, and she admitted she would RATHER walk with me since she doesn't like walking alone. She also seemed to make circles around the building as if she was lost but I was wondering if she was trying to prolong the walk on purpose to talk to me more? Although it doesn't have to be the case: she was new student too so its possible she legitimately didn't know where the mailboxes were. She talked to me about other topics along the way, and I mentioned how for me analysis is easy and abstract algebra is hard and she said for her its the other way around and she said we should study together so she can help me with abstract algebra. Now she said this right AFTER she shown me the mailboxes. Due to lack of social expeirence I didn't immediately figure out what to answer so instead of saying "oh yeah thank you so much, what time to do you normally study" I said "okay", then she said she had to go, then I realized I should have responded so I said "yes I agree we should study" then she said that "yes sure, but I have to go to such and such place" and then she insisten on writing my email address on her hand so she can get ahold of me and then she said "see you .... in class tomorrow?" Now the next day it was a different class so I didn't even know she was in that class too: I don't pay attention to names and faces. This being the case, I didn't remember where she was sitting in that other class. Unfortunately I came to that other class early and she wasn't there yet, so I just sat at a random table HOPING it would be the table she would sit on, but I was wrong she sat on a different one. Then since others were already in class I didn't have guts to change tables so I just kept looking at her, until some guy at the other table (that happened to be at the opposite site of a class from her) called me to sit next to him and I didn't have guts to say no. Then I was going to email her right after class but that guy kept following me trying to have some sort of math/physics/philosophy conversation. I only got to email her few days later and she didn't reply.

Now that was in the beginning of the semester. I asked her about logarithms in the middle of the semester if not towards the end. I didn't talk to her between those two occasions (like I said I DID sent her the email, although few days later than she would have expected but she didn't reply). Do you think THAT was why she told me to look it up about logarithms, since she felt that I blew her off few months prior to that and took it personally?

But like I said she is NOT the girl with the scarf. She is European and the girl with the scarf is Asian. And she certainly is not the "guy" who made comment about the scarf either. So I already have three different people who ignore me. And if I count all the other times when people say hi to each other before class but not to me it would be most people around.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> I forgot to mention it in my OP, but that conversation when I was freaking out over her not replying right away was over text, not online. To sum it up, what happened was
> 
> a) Conversation online (first quoted text)
> b) Four hour conversation over the phone
> c) Conversation over the text next day (second quoted text)


It doesn't matter. Unless you have specific plans to talk to someone at a specific time and they miss that appointment, you do not need to message them more than once in 24 hours.



> This might actually be onto something since this is the feedback I am getting from A LOT of people. I guess my question in this particular case is this: she is not a mind reader. The way most people know I am self focused is that most of what I say is always about myself. But in case of this girl like I said I tried to split it evenly. So are you saying there are some other clues that I am focused on myself? Obviously she hasn't tested me on whether I remember whether she has bipolar or depression. So are you saying there are something else that would give it away?


Dude, chill. It's not about how you come across to her, it's about the fact that you're trying to get into a long-term relationship with this woman and you can't even be bothered to remember which mental illness she opened up to you about. And I get being too focused inwards to care what the other person says but that's not a good basis for a relationship.

You're right, she's not a mind reader. Which means that you need to ask her questions and listen to what she's saying. You need to acknowledge that she has no responsibility to talk to you when she's busy/doesn't want to. A text is easier to deal with quickly than a phone call - therefore it's the best way to communicate with someone throughout the day when you're busy with work or whatever. As someone else said, a 4 hour phone conversation every day is not feasible.

People are not equations and formula. They are also not robots. Have you seen Westworld? Where the robots are asked to explain their actions to their creator like a log? That is not what happens in real life. You can't ask people for a report on their emotions and expect them to answer you honestly. With a girl you've just met, you have to accept that sometimes they'll want to talk to you and sometimes they won't. Some days they'll be busy and some days they won't. Some topics will be easy for them and some won't. And it's hard to navigate through it, I know that, but whenever you find yourself wanting to question her about her actions, just take a step back and do something else.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> It doesn't matter. Unless you have specific plans to talk to someone at a specific time and they miss that appointment, you do not need to message them more than once in 24 hours.


The problem is that, if you look at my text conversation with her (second quote) she DID respond to my first text right away, then she asked me how my day went, I responded then she AGAIN responded right away the second time, but then all of a sudden she wasn't responding the third time. Thats what made me wonder whether I did something wrong before the third response (which would have been my talking about the other woman). I mean, if she were to delay the very first response then I wouldn't be freaking out. What freaked me out is the way she responded first two times right away and then all of a sudden disappeared.



TheWelshOne said:


> Dude, chill. It's not about how you come across to her, it's about the fact that you're trying to get into a long-term relationship with this woman and you can't even be bothered to remember which mental illness she opened up to you about.


If I actually WERE in a long term relationship with her, more than likely I WOULD remember what mental illness she has. Which goes back to what I been explaining to Atheism about freaking out part. When I am in the relationship I am completely different person from where I am in a first few stages. In particular

1. When I am in a relationship I freak out about stuff a lot less
2. When I am in a relationship I know about the other person a lot more

Thats why I wish people could give me a chance to get past first few stages.



TheWelshOne said:


> *And I get being too focused inwards* to care what the other person says but that's not a good basis for a relationship.


And what exactly is my "inner focus" is about? Its about how lonely I am. So isn't it ironic to say "I don't want a relatioship because I need some me-time to agonize about not being in a relationship?" Well wouldn't it be better to learn to focus on others, get into that relationship, and then the need for inward focus would disappear?


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> The problem is that, if you look at my text conversation with her (second quote) she DID respond to my first text right away, then she asked me how my day went, I responded then she AGAIN responded right away the second time, but then all of a sudden she wasn't responding the third time. Thats what made me wonder whether I did something wrong before the third response (which would have been my talking about the other woman). I mean, if she were to delay the very first response then I wouldn't be freaking out. What freaked me out is the way she responded first two times right away and then all of a sudden disappeared.


Alright, well then you say "Did I do something wrong?" and wait. You don't launch into a list of options for her.



> If I actually WERE in a long term relationship with her, more than likely I WOULD remember what mental illness she has. Which goes back to what I been explaining to Atheism about freaking out part. When I am in the relationship I am completely different person from where I am in a first few stages. In particular
> 
> 1. When I am in a relationship I freak out about stuff a lot less
> 2. When I am in a relationship I know about the other person a lot more
> ...


That might be something to work on. When I learn things about people, I tend to remember them. You never know when they'll be useful. For example, I know not to assume that you're looking for sex because I know you're against sex before marriage. I know that for no other reason than I've seen you say it and it was relevant to your character. (I also have a very good memory, so maybe I'm a little different to others in that respect)

I know things about my friends even though I'm not attempting to get into a relationship with them. It shows that I have an intention to care about them and that I pay them attention. Right now it seems like you're saying "Until this woman gets into a relationship with me, she's irrelevant. But when she's my girlfriend, I'll pay attention to her and she'll be happy that I pay attention to her because she's my girlfriend."



> And what exactly is my "inner focus" is about? Its about how lonely I am. So isn't it ironic to say "I don't want a relatioship because I need some me-time to agonize about not being in a relationship?" Well wouldn't it be better to learn to focus on others, get into that relationship, and then the need for inward focus would disappear?


The need to focus inward never disappears, it just shifts. Yes you could get a girlfriend and be a good partner to her (the fact that you've had three relationships puts you above a lot of people here), but it will not suddenly make your life perfect. You will still be prone to tantrums and paranoia and over-analysing, because those things do not disappear, they take root in you and never leave. The fact that you still talk at length about your exes, and how those relationships went, means you're not going to be different after you get a girlfriend. You've even admitted that you talked to your then-girlfriends about your exes. You don't lose focus on anything when you get a girlfriend, and I think you're putting a lot of faith in an outcome that will never happen.


----------



## SplendidBob (May 28, 2014)

realisticandhopeful said:


> STOP all of this. Just stop analyzing her. This is why desperation is unattractive. You had one or 2 good convos with a girl and look at all this mess that has come from it. This is so unhealthy it's not funny. Focus on yourself. Get the help you need. You will scare off every girl until you get this behavior under control.


This.



SFC01 said:


> ffs, chill out on the lady front casualset


This.



TheWelshOne said:


> When I learn things about people, I tend to remember them. You never know when they'll be useful.


****. That last pm gonna come back to haunt me. I gotta not be a ******* now, for sure


----------



## Kandice (Jan 26, 2017)

Oh lord, if someone acted like that to me especially at 17:38, I would have dropped them like a hot potato lol. You just seem too clingy and desperate. The poor lady has a life outside of you. Let her live! She doesn't have to give you her attention all the time. And I know you don't mean this but the whole conversation is hinting an abusive relationship to me. If I had a friend who was seeing or talking to someone who wanted his/her attention 24/7 and always asking them where they were or why they're not interesting, I would tell them run fast and to change their #.
Bottom line: You need to calm yourself down.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

splendidbob said:


> ****. That last pm gonna come back to haunt me. I gotta not be a ******* now, for sure


:lol You betcha.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

causalset said:


> But then how would you explain why, after telling me what you just quoted, she also said she wants to talk about more than just that. And, besides that, during the entirety of the four hour phone conversation the academic topics never came up. If that was truly her only goal, why wouldn't she find a way to get around to that subject?
> 
> And here is a separate question. The way you phrased it, it almost seems to imply that academics is the reason she lost her interest. That reminds me of the common concept that being "friends" is a turnoff too, which always puzzled me as well: shouldn't the relationship be built on friendship? And, similarly, shouldn't the relationship be built on common interests (such as academic, for example)? Or are you saying that women are wired in a way that if I am "too much" of something (be it a "friend" or an "academic") then they think I am undatable? When I ask people on campus why people don't talk to me one common thing I hear is "you are always with the book" (referring to my habbit of doing math/physics homework in caffeteria and other public places). So is studying too much and/or talking about school too soon a turnoff? Perhaps stereotypes of Sheldon from Big Bang Theory feed this sort of misconception?


Yeah it did seem a bit on the nerdy side for conversation on a dating site. But I dont think that that would be an immediate deal breaker for everyone. She didnt strike me as being serious about going back to school anytime soon and was probably more interested in meeting a new love interest. But everyone else brought up the stuff that happened later on with the clinginess because thats pretty much guaranteed to scare away just about everyone unless they are either very desperate or looking to prey on you in some fashion.

As for the friendship first thing, keep in mind that was a dating site. The very concept of it completely bypasses friendship altogether. Sites like meetup.com are good for making friends.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Neal said:


> Yeah it did seem a bit on the nerdy side for conversation on a dating site. But I dont think that that would be an immediate deal breaker for everyone. She didnt strike me as being serious about going back to school anytime soon and was probably more interested in meeting a new love interest. But everyone else brought up the stuff that happened later on with the clinginess because thats pretty much guaranteed to scare away just about everyone unless they are either very desperate or looking to prey on you in some fashion.
> 
> As for the friendship first thing, keep in mind that was a dating site. The very concept of it completely bypasses friendship altogether. Sites like meetup.com are good for making friends.


You misunderstood me. I didn't say I was looking for just friends: I do look for serious relationship (not believing in sex before marriage doesn't negate it since there are other things that distinguish relationship from friendship, such as committment and so forth, and yes, relationship is what I want). What I was saying in the last post, though, is that I don't understand why relationship and friendship are thought of as incompatible? I thought relationship should be built on friendship, so why can't they be both together? Well, since they ARE thought of as incompatible, then between the two I would choose relationship. But the question is why does there have to be the choice?

Now let me explain myself a little bit more. No I am not going around asking for friendship and then getting surprised why they won't date me. What I DID do, however, was I talked about academic career. And now that you confronted me about the academics, I see that those two questions I have are related. One question is why can't relationship and friendship co-exist at the same time, and the other question is why can't relationship and academics co-exist at the same time. In both cases I choose relationship -- thats what I am on dating site for. But the question is why does it have to be a choice?

As a matter of fact, the reason I was trying to get her to go to university is BECAUSE I was considering dating her, and so I would perceive her as "higher quality" dating-wise if she had education too. As you might noticed I only spent few minutes trying to persuade her to go back to school. But if you take the girls I actually dated I spent days, weeks, and months with those sort of discussions (in particular I was trying to persuade my second ex not to drop out of graduate school, but she did, and then I was trying to persuade my third ex, who was homeschooled, to go to college). And its not just me: I remember one woman (who had three kids) whom I talked on dating site, and she kept trying to dissuade me from going back to school and instead tried to get me to teach in community college so that I could be better financial support for her kids.

Or could it be that the main issue is timing? As in, in case of my second ex I was trying to change her mind about her education a year into relationship (thats when she decided to drop out), in case of the third ex I did it three months into relationship but three months is still quite a bit of time, while in case of the girl I am discussing in this post I did it right away, and thats too soon? And does the same concept apply to friendship as well? As in, yes significant others are friends, but they are several months into relationship; so being friends several months into relationsihp is good but becoming friends right away is bad since it would preclude the relationship from happening?

Apart from timing, could it also be that, with my third ex, I was talking about her education in a flirty way: for instance our relationship was long distance and I talked a lot about giving her a hug when I visit her, and I once told her "when I will be giving you a hug I will be talking about your education" to which she said "its called being persuasive" and I also said that "you should get an education because of how soft you are", "its really soft to talk about education", etc. So could "this" be what distinguishes relationship with friendship? As in, if I do all the "friendship" things in a "flirty" way then its relatinoship, but if I do them in "as a matter of fact" way then I get friendzoned?

Another question is this: there was one time when I talked to a chemist over a dating site, and I told her how when I first graduated from high school I went to Siera Nevada and I was really thirsty and since I just completted AP Chemistry course I was speculating in my mind how water would dissolve the deposits in my lips. To this she said "you are too smart for me". Then I started telling her that no I am not too smart I just happened to talk about that subject and I then told her that my IQ is "only" 126 and besides I forgot most of my chemistry and she probably knows more chemistry than I do (I am a physicist) I simply don't have a concept of "when" to talk about something and when not to. In any case, she denied that she was rejecting me, she said she was only worried "I" might not like her, but since I said I like her she was willing to talk. But then throughout the conversation she found other reasons to question if I was capable of love. Since I told her I have Asperger she thought that I am like Sheldon and Sheldon can't love so she kept asking me if I ever remember being in love. Also when I told her about some of my criteria by which I like certain girls (such as education and so forth) she decided that I can't love and just have laundary list. But hey, everyon ehas their preferences, but that doesn't mean they are all incapable of love, like Sheldon!

Anyway, the point is that, based on what you said, my main mistake was that I talked to her about chemical deposits on my lips since dating site isn't the place to talk about it. But why would that imply I am savant, rather than simply I lack the knowledge of when to do what? Or do you think that when she called me "smart" she didn't really mean "smart" in a literal sense but rather she meant a show-off or something? And by the way could it be that the reason people on campus all think I am so "smart" is because I chose to study in caffeteria instead of caffee? So students who study in a caffee might study the same hours as I do, but since its normal to study in a caffee, they are okay, but in my case since its not normal to study in a caffeteria then everyone thinks I am such a savant even though in reality I study the same hours as they do just different place?


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> Alright, well then you say "Did I do something wrong?" and wait. You don't launch into a list of options for her.


Since I didn't do that, what is you guess as to what she would have answered if I did? In particular do you think she would have said that she didn't like I mentioned the other woman, or do you think she would have given me silent treatment or do you think she would have said I didn't do anything wrong and were to try to facilitate the healthy conversation?



TheWelshOne said:


> That might be something to work on. When I learn things about people, I tend to remember them. You never know when they'll be useful. For example, I know not to assume that you're looking for sex because I know you're against sex before marriage. I know that for no other reason than I've seen you say it and it was relevant to your character. (I also have a very good memory, so maybe I'm a little different to others in that respect)


When it comes to no sex before marriage, the reason you pay attention is that you KNOW its something serious. But in case of my third ex I had no clue that things like partying or taking gods name in vain are considered serious by any Chrisitan, so I didn't pay attention until things went sour. Now its not just not paying attention. Even when it comes to sex, in the previous message boards I participated in, I never bothered to explain that I was not after sex since I thought it was self evident. But then, in the last message board, when I had a lot of backlash of people assuming I was after sex, that is what got me to realize that yes people would assume that stuff unless I spell out thats not the case, which is why I spelled it out in this board. So in the same way as I would pay attention to what *I* say when I realize that it might hit some bottons, I also pay attention to what *other people* say when I realize that a specific topic is important. I mean lets face it: you are not a savant just like I am not. You can't just memorize the entire encyclopedia like Rainman did. The things you remember are the ones that you know are important. And what is important and what isn't is based on social context. So for someone who lack social experience like I do, of course I wouldn't be paying attention to things.

Let me give you another example. So my second ex got mad at me because I didn't remember what kind of ring she prefers FEW MONTHS after she mentioned it, and I couldn't explain to her for the life of me that I thought it was just a detail. Now, several years after the second ex broke up with me, and when I was with my third ex, I did biggest loser competition, and I got second place, which earned me 400 dollars, while if I were to get first place I would have gotten 4000 dollars. At first I was frustrated because I thought I just missed out on opportunity to get money. But then I learned that actually the only kind of price was gift certificate to buy jewelry. And then the frustration of why I didn't get the first place switched to the question why did I even bother competting (I ended up sending it as a gift to my then-girlfriend even though we both knew my true preference would have been to cash it out and use that money to help my mom pay off my credit card). Now, after this happened, I knew EXACTLY why my second ex was mad: if the type of a ring can make a difference between 400 dollars and 4000 dollars, then apparently its important, even though I don't understand why. So I guess if the subject of engagement ring were to ever come up AFTER I participated in that competition, I would have been a lot more likely to pay attention. But prior to that competition I didn't pay attention simply because I didn't see a significance of this.

And this goes back to why I dwell on myself so much. You see how, at the age of 34, I didn't know the concept of gift certificate and they had to actually explain to me that I can't get money off of that? Well, due to my lack of life experiences, the only things whose significanse I am familiar with are the ones that happened to me, personally. Hence all the dwelling on me. If the girl whom I were to date were to get me out of my shell and expose me to the outside world, I wouldn't be dwelling on myself any more.



TheWelshOne said:


> The need to focus inward never disappears, it just shifts. Yes you could get a girlfriend and be a good partner to her (the fact that you've had three relationships puts you above a lot of people here), but it will not suddenly make your life perfect. You will still be prone to tantrums and paranoia and over-analysing, because those things do not disappear, they take root in you and never leave. The fact that you still talk at length about your exes, and how those relationships went, means you're not going to be different after you get a girlfriend. You've even admitted that you talked to your then-girlfriends about your exes. You don't lose focus on anything when you get a girlfriend, and I think you're putting a lot of faith in an outcome that will never happen.


Well with my second ex it did disappear: I wasn't obsessed about the social rejection any mroe when I dated my second ex. In case of the third ex I continued to obsess because it was long distance relationship so I was still upset why people in the physical location where I live want nothing to do with me. But with my second ex it wasn't long distance thats why I wasn't obsessing.

Its true that I talked to second ex about Anne as well. But you have to keep in mind Anne was a sister of a senator so she was a HUGE loss to get over. But as of now it would be easier not to talk about Anne since enough years have passed so I got to terms with it.


----------



## SparklingWater (Jan 16, 2013)

@causalset

Hey did you look into getting a counselor at school?


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> Since I didn't do that, what is you guess as to what she would have answered if I did? In particular do you think she would have said that she didn't like I mentioned the other woman, or do you think she would have given me silent treatment or do you think she would have said I didn't do anything wrong and were to try to facilitate the healthy conversation?


I think she most likely would have said "Sorry, I was away from my phone" and then asked you a question to get the conversation back on track.



> When it comes to no sex before marriage, the reason you pay attention is that you KNOW its something serious.


But it's not serious to me. I'm not trying to date you (no offence) so it doesn't matter to me if you're screwing around or not.



> Let me give you another example. So my second ex got mad at me because I didn't remember what kind of ring she prefers FEW MONTHS after she mentioned it, and I couldn't explain to her for the life of me that I thought it was just a detail. Now, several years after the second ex broke up with me, and when I was with my third ex, I did biggest loser competition, and I got second place, which earned me 400 dollars, while if I were to get first place I would have gotten 4000 dollars. At first I was frustrated because I thought I just missed out on opportunity to get money. But then I learned that actually the only kind of price was gift certificate to buy jewelry. And then the frustration of why I didn't get the first place switched to the question why did I even bother competting (I ended up sending it as a gift to my then-girlfriend even though we both knew my true preference would have been to cash it out and use that money to help my mom pay off my credit card). Now, after this happened, I knew EXACTLY why my second ex was mad: if the type of a ring can make a difference between 400 dollars and 4000 dollars, then apparently its important, even though I don't understand why. So I guess if the subject of engagement ring were to ever come up AFTER I participated in that competition, I would have been a lot more likely to pay attention. But prior to that competition I didn't pay attention simply because I didn't see a significance of this.


When a woman you are dating mentions a type of ring she likes, that's a hint, man. That's the sort of thing you're supposed to log in your memory for when you get engaged. It's not about the money, it's about whether you're looking towards the future. If you saw yourself getting engaged to her, normally you'd have made some sort of note so that you could make the proposal special by getting her a ring you know she'd love.



> Its true that I talked to second ex about Anne as well. But you have to keep in mind Anne was a sister of a senator so she was a HUGE loss to get over. But as of now it would be easier not to talk about Anne since enough years have passed so I got to terms with it.


No. No. No. No. No.

Look, I mean this in the nicest possible way but you need therapy. A person's worth is not measured by their famous connections. I don't care if she's Bill Gates' daughter, you fall in love with that woman for her, not her family.

There is a reason people change after high school. (Because I know your answer to this will be 'But everyone wanted the popular jocks') People realise it's shallow and unfeasible to base their romantic relationships on the status of their partners. And if you still want to look at it that way, Anne was the sister of a senator - what was she doing with *you?* Surely she should have been trying to date the brother of the President or something.

And I know this part wasn't to me but:



> Apart from timing, could it also be that, with my third ex, I was talking about her education in a flirty way: for instance our relationship was long distance and I talked a lot about giving her a hug when I visit her, and I once told her *"when I will be giving you a hug I will be talking about your education"* to which she said "its called being persuasive" and I also said that *"you should get an education because of how soft you are", "its really soft to talk about education"*, etc. So could "this" be what distinguishes relationship with friendship? As in, if I do all the "friendship" things in a "flirty" way then its relatinoship, but if I do them in "as a matter of fact" way then I get friendzoned?


What does this mean?


----------



## Glycerin (Jun 26, 2016)

I can't believe this.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> But it's not serious to me. I'm not trying to date you (no offence) so it doesn't matter to me if you're screwing around or not.


Why put "no offense" in parenthesis? I am not gay!

In any case, if someone I am not looking to date (say, a guy, or someone who is 70 years old) tells me they don't believe in sex before marriage I would most likely remember because I know its an important life choice and so because I care about the other person I would remember things I regard as important. To give you another example, I remember a conversation between my mom and one of our mutual friends who told her he smokes once in few weeks and my mom told him "so its not too late to quit" and he said he agrees he can quit but he doesn't care about quitting. My mom doesn't remember that conversation, but I do, so thats an example where I remember something about the other person better than her. Why do I remember it? Because I felt bad for him that he was so foolish as to smoke when he doesn't have to. This doesn't affect me: I was never smoking in my life, and I am not bragging about it either, I regard it as normal, so it wasn't about me at all it was my concern for him. But if someone tells me that they don't use God's name in vain, or that they prefer a certain type of ring, then I don't pay attention since I didn't know its important until I learned hard way that it is.



TheWelshOne said:


> When a woman you are dating mentions a type of ring she likes, that's a hint, man. That's the sort of thing you're supposed to log in your memory for when you get engaged. It's not about the money, it's about whether you're looking towards the future. If you saw yourself getting engaged to her, normally you'd have made some sort of note so that you could make the proposal special by getting her a ring you know she'd love.


That makes it a perfect example of what I was talking about. Yes I was looking towards getting engaged: it was my idea and I was pushing her for an engagement back at the time when she wasn't ready yet. Despite this, I didn't remember the kind of ring. Why? Because I thought that a ring is just a formal marker to mark engagement, so it was important I get "a" ring but its not important as to "what kind" of ring I get. Let me give you an example. Suppose you get a million dollar bill. Would you care which past president is pictured on that bill? I wouldn't. But that doesn't mean I don't care about getting a million dollars. I certainly do care about it, I just think that the question as to who is pictured there is just a detail that doesn't matter. Well similarly I was thinking that, as long as it is engagement ring, it doesn't really matter exactly how it looks like. Yes quality time is important to me, but quality time consists of where we go for engagement, what we do (and yes I remember exactly what we did for engagement, we went to a hotel in Windsor where we had a hot tube inside the hotel, we were gambling, having nice food, I gave her a long engagement speech and she called her family and her family congratulated her, her grandmother said that I was a nice guy and I was getting a nice girl, etc). But you see, the type of a ring she had just wasn't one of the details that I thought was important.

But now you say that if I don't remember the ring it means I don't want to get engaged. Yet its not true. THe reason there is that misconception is that society is conditioned to think in certain ways (such as they were conditioned to think that the ring is important) and they can't possibly conceptualize that I never heard of the things that they were hearing all their life and thats why when I don't do the things they are conditioned to do, instead of assuming I never heard of them, they decide that I don't care about engagement.



TheWelshOne said:


> Look, I mean this in the nicest possible way but you need therapy. A person's worth is not measured by their famous connections. I don't care if she's Bill Gates' daughter, you fall in love with that woman for her, not her family.
> 
> There is a reason people change after high school. (Because I know your answer to this will be 'But everyone wanted the popular jocks') People realise it's shallow and unfeasible to base their romantic relationships on the status of their partners. And if you still want to look at it that way, Anne was the sister of a senator - what was she doing with *you?* Surely she should have been trying to date the brother of the President or something.


Well, the fact that she was a sister of a senator "did" imply that I would have assumed she wouldn't like me anyway and wouldn't give her a second thought. The only problem is that she did, and when she first talked to me I didn't know she was a sister of a senator so I was wondering whether she liked me or not just like I would in case of any other girl, but then when she mentioned it over the email then I was like "wow I better not miss that chance" and then when I missed it I was obsessing about it ever since. If she were to dump me for the status reason and say "well I am a sister of a senator so I better date someone of higher status" then I wouldn't have been obsessed about it since then I would just say "well I wasn't on that level to begin with so I didn't lose much" but the fact that she rejected me due to being sheltered by my mom thats what makes me obsess since I was thinking "I could have dated a sister of a senator if I wasn't foolish enough to spill my family details the first time I talk to her and/or if I was to communicate to her one simple thing that I don't like being sheltered my mom does it against my will, and I COULD have communicated it because Anne was asking me about my mom so many times, but I was ignoring her questions since I foolishly assumed she was just making a conversation". But in any case, the other reason Anne didn't date me is that she had bipolar and she said that due to bipolar she wasn't ready for a relationship -- which by the way was one of the things that she was frustrated about: that I ignored the bipolar part and was focused on my mom part. But I guess the reason for this is that, since she mentioned both in a rejection letter, the way I read it was that bipolar was something that would make her not date me right then and there, while my mom was something that would stop her from dating me later on as well. But in any case, the fact that my mom was one of the factors thats the other thing that kept me obsessed about Anne since I thought that I already dealt with my mom thing when I moved far away from home and now I was dealing with the next thing of finding someone to date, and then it was like I was told "oh no you still haven't dealt with your mom thing" four years after I assumed that I did, so it was quite a shock.

But anyway, lets get back to the point of what I was trying to say. So I dated my second ex only two years after Anne rejected me, thats why back then it was harder not to think about Anne than it is right now. As far as my third ex, I dated her 7 years after Anne so it should have been easier; but since my third ex was Miss Nebraska I couldn't help but think of her as a "replacement of Anne" which would be the reason why I talked about Anne in her case. But in any case if I were to date a girl right now most likely I wouldn't be talking about Anne (unless she would also have some connection to Anne in some way -- whether would involve her being famous, or her having connections to Germans in Cincinnatti or some other stuff like that).



TheWelshOne said:


> And I know this part wasn't to me but:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You know how when you are trying to flirt you look for excuse to flirt? So trying to persuade her to get an education would make it a good excuse since I would have to be nice towards her in order to get her to do what I want. Of course, though, that didn't apply to that girl I talked about in my OP, this only applies to the third ex. And yes I did want her to go to college, so I was sort of trying to do both things at the same time: try to persuade her to go to college, and flirt with her as I do that.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> In any case, if someone I am not looking to date (say, a guy, or someone who is 70 years old) tells me they don't believe in sex before marriage I would most likely remember because I know its an important life choice and so because I care about the other person I would remember things I regard as important. To give you another example, I remember a conversation between my mom and one of our mutual friends who told her he smokes once in few weeks and my mom told him "so its not too late to quit" and he said he agrees he can quit but he doesn't care about quitting. My mom doesn't remember that conversation, but I do, so thats an example where I remember something about the other person better than her. Why do I remember it? Because I felt bad for him that he was so foolish as to smoke when he doesn't have to. This doesn't affect me: I was never smoking in my life, and I am not bragging about it either, I regard it as normal, so it wasn't about me at all it was my concern for him. But if someone tells me that they don't use God's name in vain, or that they prefer a certain type of ring, then I don't pay attention since I didn't know its important until I learned hard way that it is.


So what you're saying is this: the choices that someone makes can be important to you; important enough to remember. But the mental illness of a woman you are hoping to date is *not* important to you. Do you see what I'm saying here? Her mental illness could potentially affect your relationship (as it did with Anne being bipolar) so it's something to note. The same way that having children from a past relationship could affect your future relationship.



> That makes it a perfect example of what I was talking about. Yes I was looking towards getting engaged: it was my idea and I was pushing her for an engagement back at the time when she wasn't ready yet. Despite this, I didn't remember the kind of ring. Why? Because I thought that a ring is just a formal marker to mark engagement, so it was important I get "a" ring but its not important as to "what kind" of ring I get. Let me give you an example. Suppose you get a million dollar bill. Would you care which past president is pictured on that bill? I wouldn't. But that doesn't mean I don't care about getting a million dollars. I certainly do care about it, I just think that the question as to who is pictured there is just a detail that doesn't matter. Well similarly I was thinking that, as long as it is engagement ring, it doesn't really matter exactly how it looks like. Yes quality time is important to me, but quality time consists of where we go for engagement, what we do (and yes I remember exactly what we did for engagement, we went to a hotel in Windsor where we had a hot tube inside the hotel, we were gambling, having nice food, I gave her a long engagement speech and she called her family and her family congratulated her, her grandmother said that I was a nice guy and I was getting a nice girl, etc). But you see, the type of a ring she had just wasn't one of the details that I thought was important.
> 
> But now you say that if I don't remember the ring it means I don't want to get engaged. Yet its not true. THe reason there is that misconception is that society is conditioned to think in certain ways (such as they were conditioned to think that the ring is important) and they can't possibly conceptualize that I never heard of the things that they were hearing all their life and thats why when I don't do the things they are conditioned to do, instead of assuming I never heard of them, they decide that I don't care about engagement.


OK, not all guys realise how important jewellery is, so I can understand that. An engagement ring is a symbol of love. Getting the right size, the right gemstone, the right metal, it all matters. What if you got her a gold ring while knowing she was allergic to gold? That would suggest you don't care enough to remember things about her, do you see? My best friend likes small dainty gemstones in rings. If some guy bought her a honking great diamond - something she would never wear comfortably - he's a) not interested in her likes and dislikes, and b) likely doing it as a status symbol since society seems to value the price of jewellery far more than the happiness of the wearer.



> Well, the fact that she was a sister of a senator "did" imply that I would have assumed she wouldn't like me anyway and wouldn't give her a second thought. The only problem is that she did, and when she first talked to me I didn't know she was a sister of a senator so I was wondering whether she liked me or not just like I would in case of any other girl, but then when she mentioned it over the email then I was like "wow I better not miss that chance" and then when I missed it I was obsessing about it ever since. If she were to dump me for the status reason and say "well I am a sister of a senator so I better date of someone higher status" then I wouldn't have been obsessed about it since then I would just say "well I wasn't on that level to begin with so I didn't lose much" but the fact that she rejected me due to being sheltered by my mom thats what makes me obsess since I was thinking "I could have dated a sister of a senator if I wasn't foolish enough to spill my family details the first time I talk to her and/or if I was to communicate to her one simple thing that I don't like being sheltered my mom does it against my will, and I COULD have communicated it because Anne was asking me about my mom so many times, but I was ignoring her questions since I foolishly assumed she was just making a conversation". But in any case, the other reason Anne didn't date me is that she had bipolar and she said that due to bipolar she wasn't ready for a relationship -- which by the way was one of the things that she was frustrated about: that I ignored the bipolar part and was focused on my mom part. But I guess the reason for this is that, since she mentioned both in a rejection letter, the way I read it was that bipolar was something that would make her not date me right then and there, while my mom was something that would stop her from dating me later on as well. But in any case, the fact that my mom was one of the factors thats the other thing that kept me obsessed about Anne since I thought that I already dealt with my mom thing when I moved far away from home and now I was dealing with the next thing of finding someone to date, and then it was like I was told "oh no you still haven't dealt with your mom thing" four years after I assumed that I did, so it was quite a shock.
> 
> But anyway, lets get back to the point of what I was trying to say. So I dated my second ex only two years after Anne rejected me, thats why back then it was harder not to think about Anne than it is right now. As far as my third ex, I dated her 7 years after Anne so it should have been easier; but since my third ex was Miss Nebraska I couldn't help but think of her as a "replacement of Anne" which would be the reason why I talked about Anne in her case. But in any case if I were to date a girl right now most likely I wouldn't be talking about Anne (unless she would also have some connection to Anne in some way -- whether would involve her being famous, or her having connections to Germans in Cincinnatti or some other stuff like that).


Yeah, you still need to get over this obsession with fame. She didn't choose you because she didn't want someone famous; she chose you because she saw something she liked in you. And you're proving that you're not understanding what we're talking about with this current girl too. Being bipolar is a huge deal in someone's life and will affect them forever. It's not like a cold, where you get over it after a little while. Committing to somebody with a mental illness is a big step and means having to actually accept their illness and the limitations it may put on you. This whole forum is filled with people who have a mental illness that will likely never fully go away. Any person around us needs to learn to deal with that and accept us for who we are at our weakest, and not everyone is capable of that.



> You know how when you are trying to flirt you look for excuse to flirt? So trying to persuade her to get an education would make it a good excuse since I would have to be nice towards her in order to get her to do what I want. Of course, though, that didn't apply to that girl I talked about in my OP, this only applies to the third ex. And yes I did want her to go to college, so I was sort of trying to do both things at the same time: try to persuade her to go to college, and flirt with her as I do that.


Dude... seriously? No. "Get an education" is not flirting. "I will like you more when you have a degree" is also not flirting. Suggestions of higher education are just that - suggestions. It's ultimately the choice of the person who would get the education. Especially with college tuition fees as high as they are in the US, I wouldn't begrudge anyone who skipped higher education for practical employment.

Also I'm not sure what "soft" means to you but it sounds kind of insulting in those contexts I quoted.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> OK, not all guys realise how important jewellery is, so I can understand that. An engagement ring is a symbol of love. Getting the right size, the right gemstone, the right metal, it all matters. What if you got her a gold ring while knowing she was allergic to gold? That would suggest you don't care enough to remember things about her, do you see? My best friend likes small dainty gemstones in rings. If some guy bought her a honking great diamond - something she would never wear comfortably - he's a) not interested in her likes and dislikes, and b) likely doing it as a status symbol since society seems to value the price of jewellery far more than the happiness of the wearer.


But you see, it never occurred to me that the ring can be uncomfortable or she might be allergic to it. Well I guess if they were to ask me in the store what finger size she wants then I would call and ask her since I would understand that the ring would fall off the finger or be too tight. But if they were to ask what kind of jewelry she wants then I wouldn't see why its important -- well I would now since I remember that fight we had about it, but I wouldn't have known it prior to that. You said she might be allergic to something but that is something that wouldn't have occurred to me.

The biggest clue in what you just wrote is that its symbol of love. And that is where I say that my problem is lack of knowledge of social conventions. I didn't realize that how much thought I put in the choice of the ring is a symbol of how much I love her. I was thinking how much I love her is expressed in how much quality time I spend with her, not the ring. Now I am not saying I won't follow this social rule; now that I know this I would try and follow it. All I am saying is that when it SEEMS like I am self-focused or not paying attention to things, it is most likely due to lack of knowledge regarding their significance as opposed to not caring.



TheWelshOne said:


> Yeah, you still need to get over this obsession with fame. She didn't choose you because she didn't want someone famous; she chose you because she saw something she liked in you.


Let me correct you: she never chose me. We never dated on the first place. In fact that is the other thing she was frustrated about: that I acted as if we dated and she dumped me when in fact we never dated to begin with. I guess the reason I act as if we did is because she approached me in math class, she invited me to study in the library together (and no we weren't taking the same classes -- the math class where we met was a seminar so it had no homework; so the whole purpose of why we do our respective homework in the same place seemed like she wanted to spend time with me) she also cooked for me, and so forth. So thats why its hard to believe when she says she wasn't looking for a relationship on the first place due to bipolar; it seems a lot more like she "did" consider dating me and then changed her mind when she heard about my mom (which I am not putting into her mouth either -- she DID mention my mom as one reason why she wouldn't date me). But in any case, from factual point of view no we weren't official at any point in time, I just keep contemplating if we could have been.

But since you mentioned how Anne supposedly doesn't care about my status, then how come she rejected me due to mom issue? One thing that she said that stuck in my mind was "how would our relationship be any different if we were in a relationship" Her intention of saying it was to get me "look you aren't missing out on anything look at all the great time we spend together" But I can turn it around and ask "well if the label of relationship truly doesn't matter, why do you make it a point not to give that label to me? So apparently it does matter?" But, like she said, we did all the "relationship" things. So why would my mom be an issue then? Obviously my mom didn't pose any practical barriers since it didn't stop us from spending time together. So how else is my mom a problem? Apparently because a "boyfriend" is a title of sorts and I "didn't deserve the title" of a boyfriend due to the fact that my mom shelters me -- which is precisely why I was so much insulted by the way Anne acted. If Anne truly didn't like my being sheltered, why did she spend so much time with me? So apparently she was perfectly fine with it, which means that her only issue was that my mom somehow lowered my social status which is mere formality hence her "formally" refusing to call me boyfriend. So if its okay for her to evaluate me based on the status, why isn't it okay for me to worry about her being sister of a senator?

By the way, by looking at her family it does seem like they care about heritage, at the very least (although they don't care about fame). In particular, Anne came from a prominent German community in Cincinnatti, and one of the professors whose class I am currently taking is her cousin in law also happens to be German as well (no, this has nothing to do with my choice of school; I chose this school because of some other professors that do the exact type of physics that I want to do and it was a mere coincidence that her cousin in law happened to work here, which I didn't know until I asked her for advice regarding getting paid -- I knew "she" transferred out here, although she left a couple of years before I came -- and then she suggested I ask her cousin in law who works here, which I didn't know). I guess in both cases I could ask "so why would either of them consider dating me if I am neither British nor German (I am Jewish)" so I guess its not the only thing they care about, but obviously they do care about it at least to some extend since they preserved their family purity for the most part. Miss Nebraska's family history is the other big reason why I liked her: she said that her ancestors came to US on Mayflower but she didn't give me any more detail since it was a family secret which she would only tell me when we marry. So if those things weren't important, why would those be family secrets? Incidentally in case of Miss Nebraska when I visited her I learned from her dad that actually he wasn't pure British, he was partially Scottish, and it was her mom's side that was pure, so I kept asking her ever since why she lead me to believe she was pure, and never corrected me when I was giving her compliments about it. Similarly, she also told me she was 150 lbl, but when I visitted her she looked a lot bigger than that, and she admitted that she only meant she was going to become 150 lbl later on and refused to tell me her actual weight despite my asking (the way she mentioned her weight on the first place is that I was talking about my participating in biggest loser and she was giving me weight loss advice and she simply mentioned her own weight without my having to ask; so I have no clue why would she lie about her weight in that particular context). In the context of brexit (which was a couple of years after she broke up with me) someone mentioned that "British" and "English" isn't the same thing, and "British" includes Irish and Scottish; so since her dad's admixture that I was concerned about was Scottish that might be part of why she hasn't corrected me. Although he had German admixture too, and in this context her response was pretty funny. She said "aren't you at least happy I have German in me" (in reference to my telling her how much I like Anne for the fact that she was German) and I was like "hmmm interesting question: on the one hand, being part German makes you more similar to Anne, but on the other hand it makes you less similar since you are less pure".

Sorry due to character limit I have to split my reply in two parts, so see the next part below


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Here is a continuation of the previous reply (had to split it in two due to character limit)



TheWelshOne said:


> And you're proving that you're not understanding what we're talking about with this current girl too. Being bipolar is a huge deal in someone's life and will affect them forever. It's not like a cold, where you get over it after a little while. Committing to somebody with a mental illness is a big step and means having to actually accept their illness and the limitations it may put on you. This whole forum is filled with people who have a mental illness that will likely never fully go away. Any person around us needs to learn to deal with that and accept us for who we are at our weakest, and not everyone is capable of that.


I guess maybe its my own lack of knowledge about bipolar which goes back to what I told you about the ring. I mean, I would never date someone with schizophrenia because THAT would be a problem. But bipolar seems to me like something a lot less serious -- maybe because I met people with bipolar and they came across like normal people. For example back when I was in high school there was a bipolar girl in my cross country team, and the coach of that same team had depression; also one of the girls I dated had bipolar as well (no she wasn't one of the three girls I keep talking about, our relationship was pretty brief) also as I said Anne had bipolar, and I didn't notice anything odd about her either, and I can go on and on. In fact if someone were to say they have kids this would be a serious turn off when it comes to dating them, but bipolar won't be since I don't think bipolar would pose nearly as much of a burden as kids.

But perhaps I just don't know enough about it? If so that would be another confirmation of the point I am trying to make that I do pay attention to others, I just am not knowledgeble enough to know what is important and what isn't.



TheWelshOne said:


> Dude... seriously? No. "Get an education" is not flirting. "I will like you more when you have a degree" is also not flirting. Suggestions of higher education are just that - suggestions. It's ultimately the choice of the person who would get the education. Especially with college tuition fees as high as they are in the US, I wouldn't begrudge anyone who skipped higher education for practical employment.
> 
> Also I'm not sure what "soft" means to you but it sounds kind of insulting in those contexts I quoted.


What I am talking about is that I did that in a flirty WAY. When I said she was "soft" what I meant is that I want to snuggle with her. I guess some people don't understand this because they like rough sex or whatever; but in my case affection is all about softness, so when I try to tell a girl how much I like her I would tell her that she is soft. The girls I dated didn't understand it at first and were confused, but then down the road when they finally understood what I was trying to say with 'soft" they came to like it. In fact with Miss Nebraska we had a "softy game" where I would try to prove to her that she is softer than me and she would try to prove to me that I am softer. Like for example she would tell me "see you said this affectionate thing so you are the softer one" and I would say "no its your softness that prompted me to say it, so you are the softer one" and then she would say "we are even" and I would say "no you are definitely the softer one because girls are softer than guys" and she would say "well when we both grow old you will have Alzchemer's first since you are two years older, so you will forget about our softness game and I will take advantage of it and tell you that you are softer" and I would be like "well the memory loss isn't timed so exactly but fact remains that you are softer because you are a woman". Also big part of the game was comparison to cats who are soft. I was always comparing her to a cat I had in Russia. Then at some point when I moved into a new place and my landlord had two cats she said "good so you can have a real one". Then at some point she suggested that I give those cats tuna and that would make them like me more, this worked; so I kept telling her that next time I visit her I would feed her tuna in order to "soften her up" and she would say she wouldn't eat it since it is imported from China and she eats only local produce, and I would tell her that if I give her a hug she would melt and then she wouldn't be able to help but eat it, just like when I pet a cat and she melts she would stop going wherever she was going. Miss Nebraska was participating in those cat things too. Like for example during my first visit she was going to show me how on the phone that she uses (which is one of those simple phones that were used over a decade ago) it took a long time to send texts, and how in order to type a letter "b" for example you had to select "abc" and then push "forward" to go from a to b, and how it takes time. So she was going to show me a sample text and guess what: she typed "this cat is really soft" and I was like "see you want to snuggle" and she was like "oh no I was just giving you an example" and I was like "but it was really soft of you to give this particular one" and gave her a hug.

In any case, there was one time when I was talking to her about education and she said "awww" in order to distract me ("awww" is what she says when we have our affectionate conversations) and then she clarified that no she doesn't plan to go to college but she just likes it when I bring it up. I guess it was one off because later on I told her that its soft to talk about her education (in reference to what she said back then) and she said "no its not soft to talk about it" but I guess in my mind it was. In any case I liked using "softness" to get her to do something she doesn't want to do. Like remember how I said she lied to me she was 150 lbl and then I found she weight much more when I visitted her. So when I was trying to get her to tell me her true weight I was telling her "because you trust me so much, thats why you are going to tell me how much you weight" and she was like "none of the girls I know are telling their boyfriends their weight" and I would say "but in our case our love is so special, because you trust me so much more than those girls trust their boyfriends, thats why you will be the only girl that would tell me her weight". And, with education, I was saying similar things: I was syaing "because I love you so much, thats why I want you to get an education", "I think you should get an education because of how soft you are", etc.

Incidentally, I also got Miss Nebraska to like Anne conversations as well. Like there was a time when I would say a soft thing, then pause so she could say "awww" then I would say another soft thing, then pause again so she could say "awww" and then after saying around 3 or 5 such things I would say "you are just like Anne" and she would say "awww" to that as well! The other such example was that I kept pretending she was the same person as Anne: for example I asked Miss Nebraska "why do you think its a good thing to be close to the family, yet back in 2005 you rejected me for the fact that I am too close to my mom" to which she replied "back in 2005 I was in a different body and mind" (I dated Miss Nebraska in 2012--2014; I met Anne in 2005; so the whole point was to pretend they are the same person when they aren't). And then there was another time when she herself did that without my even knowing. Like I was trying to persuade her to go to college and she said "I already been to college" and I said "no, you been to community college and did hospitality major, but I am talking about four year college" and she said "I been to four year college, and more" then I looked puzzled, and then she said "remember?" and then I realized she was pretending to be the same person as Anne. The other example where she actually did that herself was that when I was bringing up Anne she was saying "we should watch Anne of Gables next time you visit me". I thought it was a joke, but during my Thanksgiving visit to her, she actually had me with her whole family watch Anne of Gables. Now her whole family is strict southern baptist and even though she is in her 30-s she still lives in home and listens to what parents say -- so she told me to never mention Anne to them or else they would ask her to break up with me and she would have to follow through. So obviously they didn't know that Anne of Gables had anything to do with Anne; I have no clue what she told them as the reason for our choice of movie to watch. But it was pretty funny. I couldn't help but giggling, I was really tempted to tell her sister "I would have never liked her so much if it wasn't for Anne" but I stopped myself from saying it. In any case she DID break up with me the next day after I left. I have no idea whether it had anything to do with that movie or not. There was other reasons I can think of, such as the fact that I asked her if I could cancel that visit so that I could work with my physics professor on one of our papers during thanksgiving break and then changed my mind and decided to visit her when she was upset. Other things included her being picky on my occasional use of cuss words due to her southern baptist background as well as being jealous about IMAGINED girls that are NOT anne and that never existed but she thought they did. We dated total of 2 years, but last 4 months of the relationship she became really picky about things and then it ended with that thanksgiving visit.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

causalset said:


> You misunderstood me. I didn't say I was looking for just friends: I do look for serious relationship (not believing in sex before marriage doesn't negate it since there are other things that distinguish relationship from friendship, such as committment and so forth, and yes, relationship is what I want). What I was saying in the last post, though, is that I don't understand why relationship and friendship are thought of as incompatible? I thought relationship should be built on friendship, so why can't they be both together? Well, since they ARE thought of as incompatible, then between the two I would choose relationship. But the question is why does there have to be the choice?


No these are not exclusive. I have heard of people going from a friendship to dating. Theres this Asian woman in my class that was friends with this guy from her church and they dated (sort of) off and on for like 7 years and just now finally decided to become a exclusive couple. But it kinda boggles my mind though. I dont have enough dating experience to give you even close to a good answer as to when to know if youre moving "too slow" for a woman. The site youre on could influence that I'd bet. I hear eHarmony is more for religious people looking for long term stuff, while Tinder is just for hooking up. I didnt misunderstand you, its just how I prefer to meet people. If I were to start dating again, Id rather meet people of similar interests under low risk circumstances. On dating sites feel like job hunting to me. Theyre indeed faster, but like i said its super competitive and people wont waste too much time with you.


causalset said:


> Since I told her I have Asperger she thought that I am like Sheldon and Sheldon can't love so she kept asking me if I ever remember being in love. Also when I told her about some of my criteria by which I like certain girls (such as education and so forth) she decided that I can't love and just have laundary list. But hey, everyon ehas their preferences, but that doesn't mean they are all incapable of love, like Sheldon!





causalset said:


> As a matter of fact, the reason I was trying to get her to go to university is BECAUSE I was considering dating her, and so I would perceive her as "higher quality" dating-wise if she had education too.


 I get what youre saying, but Id warn you that if you let that attitude come forth in how you speak to people, it may explain why women have said youre like Sheldon Cooper. Most people like to be loved for who they already are, so if your first impulse is to "fix" them, then they'll go find someone that'll tell them what they want to hear. You sound very pragmatic when it comes to relationships. You may not feel that way inside, but it comes through (at least on here) in how you talk about it. But like you said everyone has their preferences. I was very smitten with one professor of mine and she is only a year older than me. After I made my advances she told me "people with PHDs typically date others with PHDs". Granted I only have a bachelors so it sounded like she was saying I wasnt smart enough for her. It was extremely pragmatic and it changed how I felt about her real fast. But shes engaged to another professor now so that was the route to go for her. I dont know where Im going with this, other than just look for people that fit what youre looking for or try watch how you speak because women seem to be picking up on that pragmatic side of you and its causing you to lose your chances.



causalset said:


> Anyway, the point is that, based on what you said, my main mistake was that I talked to her about chemical deposits on my lips since dating site isn't the place to talk about it. But why would that imply I am savant, rather than simply I lack the knowledge of when to do what? Or do you think that when she called me "smart" she didn't really mean "smart" in a literal sense but rather she meant a show-off or something? And by the way could it be that the reason people on campus all think I am so "smart" is because I chose to study in caffeteria instead of caffee? So students who study in a caffee might study the same hours as I do, but since its normal to study in a caffee, they are okay, but in my case since its not normal to study in a caffeteria then everyone thinks I am such a savant even though in reality I study the same hours as they do just different place?


No she just probably picked up on how particular you are and it hurt her self esteem. Like I said, they are pretty intuitive. And what are the other people in the cafe doing? They probably are there to eat and socialize since its not a designated quiet area.


----------



## eddyr (Aug 1, 2011)

What's scary is I can see exactly where he went wrong, but I can never see where I go wrong and I know I do. There are some people here who have contributed much more and better than I will. You were too desperate and clingy and sometimes you were delving into subjects too much. You did well at the start up and until the phone convo, after that the paranoia and obsession killed it for you. 

Do what she does man, talk to loads of people, surround yourself. Keep yourself busy, don't allow yourself to think twice about things. Only when there is concrete evidence would you ever ask about something. Become your own best friend. You're clearly intelligent, this facet alone is enough to get you far in life. Love yourself, embrace the true you. 

Personally, I would stop with dating sites as well. They're not for everybody.

Edd.


----------



## SofaKing (May 9, 2014)

I really do feel sympathy for your condition and its affect on your social interactions. Your heart is always in the right place and you're clearly an intelligent person.

All I can say, is that you are "exhausting" to others, I believe. You just overwhelm them. All your threads are like novels and you can't let go of any little point due to your hyper-analysis. And you recount these epic conversations and interactions that can be testing to anyone, considering that you're rather blunt, direct, etc.

Again, I hope there is the right kind of therapy to help you put your brakes on and allow others feel that they'd have balance in a relationship with you.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> Let me correct you: she never chose me. We never dated on the first place.


You mean I've been arguing all this time about a girl who was never actually a girlfriend? :doh

Look, your mother is clearly a big influence on you and you clearly love her. But your exes obviously saw that there was something in the relationship that they wouldn't be able to handle long term. One day you might find a woman who doesn't care.



> Incidentally in case of Miss Nebraska when I visited her I learned from her dad that actually he wasn't pure British, he was partially Scottish, and it was her mom's side that was pure, so I kept asking her ever since why she lead me to believe she was pure, and never corrected me when I was giving her compliments about it. Similarly, she also told me she was 150 lbl, but when I visitted her she looked a lot bigger than that, and she admitted that she only meant she was going to become 150 lbl later on and refused to tell me her actual weight despite my asking (the way she mentioned her weight on the first place is that I was talking about my participating in biggest loser and she was giving me weight loss advice and she simply mentioned her own weight without my having to ask; so I have no clue why would she lie about her weight in that particular context). In the context of brexit (which was a couple of years after she broke up with me) someone mentioned that "British" and "English" isn't the same thing, and "British" includes Irish and Scottish; so since her dad's admixture that I was concerned about was Scottish that might be part of why she hasn't corrected me. Although he had German admixture too, and in this context her response was pretty funny. She said "aren't you at least happy I have German in me" (in reference to my telling her how much I like Anne for the fact that she was German) and I was like "hmmm interesting question: on the one hand, being part German makes you more similar to Anne, but on the other hand it makes you less similar since you are less pure".


Are you seriously talking pure-blood mania? Really?

And yes, British is not a 'pure' term. I'm British. But I'm Welsh, which is part of Britain, like England and Scotland.

As for the weight, most women are sensitive to it, especially when it comes to potential partners. She likely hoped she could get to 150lb before you realised she was ever larger, since 150lb opens up far more dating prospects than 200lb.



causalset said:


> What I am talking about is that I did that in a flirty WAY. When I said she was "soft" what I meant is that I want to snuggle with her. *I guess some people don't understand this because they like rough sex or whatever*


Whoa, that's a big offensive leap you took there, man. Where I come from, telling someone they're soft means they're weak. That's never a compliment and it has nothing to do with affection or sex.



> In any case I liked using "softness" to get her to do something she doesn't want to do. Like remember how I said she lied to me she was 150 lbl and then I found she weight much more when I visitted her. So when I was trying to get her to tell me her true weight I was telling her "because you trust me so much, thats why you are going to tell me how much you weight" and she was like "none of the girls I know are telling their boyfriends their weight" and I would say "but in our case our love is so special, because you trust me so much more than those girls trust their boyfriends, thats why you will be the only girl that would tell me her weight". And, with education, I was saying similar things: I was syaing "because I love you so much, thats why I want you to get an education", "I think you should get an education because of how soft you are", etc.


Yeah... this just sounds creepy and controlling.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> ...if someone tells me that they don't use God's name in vain, or that they prefer a certain type of ring, then I don't pay attention since I didn't know its important until I learned hard way that it is.


The reason you're supposed to pay attention isn't because of the importance of *what* you are being told but because of the importance of *who* is telling you. You'll probably miss some things and forget some things over time as you're not a robot, but hopefully you'd remember what was most important to that person assuming you develop a meaningful relationship. Using the examples you provided, you should remember that they don't use God's name in vain because it upsets them and not upsetting them is important to you, you should remember the things they like because making them happy is important to you.

Not because their opinions on blasphemy, jewellery or whatever are interesting to you in and of themselves.



causalset said:


> You know how when you are trying to flirt you look for excuse to flirt? So trying to persuade her to get an education would make it a good excuse since I would have to be nice towards her in order to get her to do what I want. Of course, though, that didn't apply to that girl I talked about in my OP, this only applies to the third ex. And yes I did want her to go to college, so I was sort of trying to do both things at the same time: try to persuade her to go to college, and flirt with her as I do that.


This highlights one of your issues, they way you communicate makes it appear that you're only thinking about yourself and lacking consideration for the other person. You shouldn't be suggesting someone improve their education because you prefer women who are college/university educated, you should be doing it because you think it would be the best thing for them (even if you weren't in their life). Not to get her to do what *you* want but what would be best for *her*, that would show that you cared about her and not just yourself.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> You mean I've been arguing all this time about a girl who was never actually a girlfriend? :doh


As far as sister of a senator I only knew her for a month (and only first week was good -- then at the end of first week I asked her to be my girlfriend, she rejected me and then it deteriorated from there, and by the end of the month she was no longer talking to me).

On the other hand, as far as Miss Nebraska, I did in fact date her and we were exclusive. Our relationship lasted for 2 years. At the same time, it was long distance relationship: during first 1 1/2 years of it I was in India and then the last 1/2 year when I was back in the states I was living in a different state than her and, despite her being in her 30s, her parents are controling (they are southern baptist) so she couldn't go visit me, it had to be me visitting her and I only visitted her twice: during July 4 and during Thanksgiving; then she broke up with me after the second visit. But in any case she agreed to marry me -- although she didn't tell her family that, nor were we officially engaged.

I did have two engagements to my first two ex-s, but neither of them were famous (although my second ex was a graduate student, but then she dropped out; the first ex only went to community college, and she only go after we broke up). The funny part is that timewise the sequence was like this:

2003--2004: Relationship that lead to first engagement
2005: Anne (only 1 week or at most 1 month)
2007-2009: Relationship that lead to second engagement
2012 --2014: Miss Nebraska

Now when I was talking to Miss Nebraska I spent A LOT more time talking about Anne than I did talking about my other two ex-s put together. And the other equally funny thing is that, during few occasions when I did talk about my other two ex-s she got jealous real fast (heck, she was even jealous about some family friend whom I only talk to once in few years and it took few hours to get her to believe me that I never dated her), while in case of Anne she wasn't jealous no matter how much I talked about her. So I actually pointed it out to her and told her "see, this proves that you are the same person as Anne: the reason you can't be jealous about Anne is that you can't be jealous about yourself".

But in any case back to what you asked, yes Miss Nebraska (my 3rd ex) was my girlfriend, but sister of senator wasn't.



TheWelshOne said:


> Look, your mother is clearly a big influence on you and you clearly love her.


Not true (not in a sense that you mean) I want independence from my mom, which is why I moved away from home. I simply don't have guts to stand up to her. Thats part of why I was mad at Anne since she "told me" I like what my mom does and didn't believe me when I told her otherwise. I don't like when people are "telling me" what my preferences are instead of letting me speak for myself. In fact here is an interesting logical parallel:

Other people: You clearly don't like to socialize since you are always by yourself
Me: Yes I like to socialize, I just don't know how to approach people. In fact I resent the fact that they don't approach me.
Anne: You clearly like to be sheltered since your mom shelters you
Me: No I don't like to be sheltered, I just don't know how to stand up to my mom. In fact I resent the fact that my mom shelters me.

As far as my mom influencing my decisions, thats not true either. For instance, my mom didn't want me to take too many courses (she thought it was hard on me) but I took the maximal number of classes I was allowed to take anyway. My mom didn't want me to go to school at a different state than her, but I went to school at a different state anyway. My mom didn't want me to go to India for a postdoc but I went to India anyway. My entire family is Jewish but I decided to become Christian (although I never told my mom), and the list goes on.

Speaking of India I actually wrote Anne emails from India trying to refute what she said back in 2005 (I was in India in 2009 -- 2014 and I was sending her emails once a year, then after a couple of replies she would stop writing then a year later I would try writing her again with the same outcome). And when I confronted her on why she thinks I am influenced by your mom she said "no I don't think so, look at how you are by yourself in India" but I said "okay here is where you thought that" and sent her the rejection letter as an attachment; but then she never responded again (this happened to be a couple of weeks before I started talking to Miss Nebraska).



TheWelshOne said:


> As for the weight, most women are sensitive to it, especially when it comes to potential partners. She likely hoped she could get to 150lb before you realised she was ever larger, since 150lb opens up far more dating prospects than 200lb.


Like I said, Miss Nebraska was my girlfriend, so that whole thing about dating prospects" is irrelevent. By the way, despite her being 30 when we started dating, I was the only guy she ever dated. She came from devoted southern baptist family, so she didn't like other guys because they weren't up to her moral standards (partying is one of the prime examples). Thats probably why when I complained about Asperger she didn't think it was so serious and instead was telling me it was normal for people my age not to have social life, just like her family doesn't. But then when I came back to the states and had some remote signs of social life (such as my family having a female friend my age coming over, or my being invited to a party by a landlord) this seriously shook our relationship, leading to breakup. Sometimes I think maybe she picked me BECAUSE of my Asperger and then broke up with me when it turned out my Asperger wasn't severe enough for her.

As far as sister of a senator, she was atheist. So, since for Miss Nebraska faith is like the main thing, sometimes she was asking me why was I willing to date an atheist anyway; and when I was telling her "you are just like Anne" she was responding "I am nothing like her" in reference to their faith being pretty much opposite to each other.



TheWelshOne said:


> Whoa, that's a big offensive leap you took there, man. Where I come from, telling someone they're soft means they're weak. That's never a compliment and it has nothing to do with affection or sex.


She kind of wondered about it at first, but when she understood what it meant in my case, she came to like it. In fact she was telling me I was very romantic.



TheWelshOne said:


> Yeah... this just sounds creepy and controlling.


She wasn't upset by this though. I think she understood I meant it in affectionate way.


----------



## Ominous Indeed (Sep 6, 2015)

causalset said:


> As far as sister of a senator I only knew her for a month (and only first week was good -- then at the end of first week I asked her to be my girlfriend, she rejected me and then it deteriorated from there, and by the end of the month she was no longer talking to me).
> 
> TOO SOON. You don't ask someone to be your girlfriend after 1 week. I figure you want numbers so lets say 3 months or more
> 
> ...


Random stuff.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> As far as sister of a senator I only knew her for a month (and only first week was good -- then at the end of first week I asked her to be my girlfriend, she rejected me and then it deteriorated from there, and by the end of the month she was no longer talking to me).
> 
> On the other hand, as far as Miss Nebraska, I did in fact date her and we were exclusive. Our relationship lasted for 2 years. At the same time, it was long distance relationship: during first 1 1/2 years of it I was in India and then the last 1/2 year when I was back in the states I was living in a different state than her and, despite her being in her 30s, her parents are controling (they are southern baptist) so she couldn't go visit me, it had to be me visitting her and I only visitted her twice: during July 4 and during Thanksgiving; then she broke up with me after the second visit. But in any case she agreed to marry me -- although she didn't tell her family that, nor were we officially engaged.
> 
> ...


OK, so not only did you not date this Anne girl that you talk about all the time, you only knew her for a month 12 years ago? That is an unhealthy attachment. And if Miss Nebraska knew the whole story, she'd be unlikely to be jealous like she would be with your exes; there's no threat with Anne, unlike the other women. Although the way you obsess about Anne does suggest no woman is ever going to match up to that ideal in your head.



> Not true (not in a sense that you mean) I want independence from my mom, which is why I moved away from home. I simply don't have guts to stand up to her.


How did you assume I meant it?

You and your mother moved here when you were 14. I'm assuming your English wasn't very good then (if you knew any at all), and you talk to her in Russian so I would assume her English still isn't very good. Coupled with your Aspergers, I can see why she shelters you and wants to keep you safe. And I understand. My mother is controlling and is one of the main reasons I have no independence in my life.



> Speaking of India I actually wrote Anne emails from India trying to refute what she said back in 2005 (I was in India in 2009 -- 2014 and I was sending her emails once a year, then after a couple of replies she would stop writing then a year later I would try writing her again with the same outcome). And when I confronted her on why she thinks I am influenced by your mom she said "no I don't think so, look at how you are by yourself in India" but I said "okay here is where you thought that" and sent her the rejection letter as an attachment; but then she never responded again (this happened to be a couple of weeks before I started talking to Miss Nebraska).


OMG, you harassed a woman that you had known for a month five-nine years earlier. Dude, that is really not cool.



> Like I said, Miss Nebraska was my girlfriend, so that whole thing about dating prospects" is irrelevent. By the way, despite her being 30 when we started dating, I was the only guy she ever dated. She came from devoted southern baptist family, so she didn't like other guys because they weren't up to her moral standards (partying is one of the prime examples). Thats probably why when I complained about Asperger she didn't think it was so serious and instead was telling me it was normal for people my age not to have social life, just like her family doesn't. But then when I came back to the states and had some remote signs of social life (such as my family having a female friend my age coming over, or my being invited to a party by a landlord) this seriously shook our relationship, leading to breakup. Sometimes I think maybe she picked me BECAUSE of my Asperger and then broke up with me when it turned out my Asperger wasn't severe enough for her.
> 
> As far as sister of a senator, she was atheist. So, since for Miss Nebraska faith is like the main thing, sometimes she was asking me why was I willing to date an atheist anyway; and when I was telling her "you are just like Anne" she was responding "I am nothing like her" in reference to their faith being pretty much opposite to each other.


The discussion was lying about weight, I'm not sure what this all has to do with anything.

Listen to @LonelyLurker, he's saying what I wanna say, only better.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> This highlights one of your issues, they way you communicate makes it appear that you're only thinking about yourself and lacking consideration for the other person. You shouldn't be suggesting someone improve their education because you prefer women who are college/university educated, you should be doing it because you think it would be the best thing for them (even if you weren't in their life). Not to get her to do what *you* want but what would be best for *her*, that would show that you cared about her and not just yourself.


I do care about other people whom I don't date. I guess it is just hard to imagine that someone who makes choices other than the ones I would make wouldn't regret it later on in life, so my advice tends to be centered around the choices I would be making which is what makes people think I am pushing my point of view on them. But on my end I genuinely think my advice is a good one and I am trying to spare them the regret they would have if they don't do what I think they should and then see the error of their ways down the line.

And yes I been giving advice to males too. For example, my mom used to invite Russan singers to sing at her house, so one of such people she was inviting was Zadvorny, who died in car accident. Now, back when he was young he was doing ph.d. in math, but then a year short of completting it he switched to music. I was trying to persuade him to go back and finish his thesis. My mom was telling me that he doesn't need it any more, and I was saying its just a year left so why not finish it and go back to music. My mom was sure it was silly and he won't listen anyway; but to her surprise he actually got ahold of his past thesis advisor; the only thing that stopped him from going through was the car accident.

The other example was in my math class last semester. A guy in that class had bipolar and he was falling asleep in class. I sent him an email trying to persuade him to go off the meds. He said he would consider it, and I thought he was just being polite. Then later I learned that he dropped out because he oversleepted a midterm. I tried to challenge his decision to drop out and he was responding that he was just a ****ty student. So I told him that he is not a ****ty student it was the meds that screwed him over, and he said that actually he was off the meds when he oversleeped (although I have no idea whether he went off the meds due to my advice or if he decided it on his own). In any case I kept trying to persuade him to go back to school, but he just got mad at me for pushing my view on him and stopped replying.

As you see both of those people were male, so I had nothing to gain out of telling them to go to school or get off the meds. So I do care about others. It is just that I can't relate to them having priorities different from mine. Thats why if they talk about things I can't relate to such as jewelry it comes across like I don't care. But if I were to increase my life experience I would be able to relate to things that don't match my exact perspective.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> A guy in that class had bipolar and he was falling asleep in class. I sent him an email trying to persuade him to go off the meds.


OK, you readily admit that you don't know much about being bipolar. Admittedly I don't know much either. But you intentionally tried to persuade someone to go off their meds? How dare you? You are not a doctor, that is not your call to make.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> OK, you readily admit that you don't know much about being bipolar. Admittedly I don't know much either. But you intentionally tried to persuade someone to go off their meds? How dare you? You are not a doctor, that is not your call to make.


Because I overheard his conversation with professor where he told him he falls asleep in class due to meds.

Apart from that, I read that in the past meds were called "chemical lobotomy" which were their original purpose rather than side effect: kind of like if computer says 3+3=4 just hit it with a hammer then it wont be able to say anything at all, including 3+3=4, and the fact that it won't be able to do anythign else well its just side effect. I totally don't agree with this approach thats why I am against meds in general.

Now I don't usually push my view on people but like I said I felt bad he was falling asleep in class. Now I fall asleep too but in my case its because I study late hours, so at least I am trying not to do it. But in his case its like he tries to ruin his brain on purpose. Kind of like deliberately staying up all night doing nothing just to make sure he would be sleepy for its own sake because, you know, sleepy people are more managible. I mean for first several weeks I tried really hard not to say anything, but it was just too painful to watch so eventually I sent him that email.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> I do care about other people whom I don't date. I guess it is just hard to imagine that someone who makes choices other than the ones I would make wouldn't regret it later on in life, so my advice tends to be centered around the choices I would be making which is what makes people think I am pushing my point of view on them. But on my end I genuinely think my advice is a good one and I am trying to spare them the regret they would have if they don't do what I think they should and then see the error of their ways down the line.


I thought you might say something like that, that's why I specifically said "makes it appear that". One thing you're going to have to learn if you want to stop having these problems is that when it comes to human interaction "perception is reality". How you come across is significantly more important than what you actually are, is it right/fair? No. Is it true anyway? Yes, so you're just going to have to accept it (assuming you want things to change that is). Unfortunately I can't really help with the empathy issue, I tend to find it fairly easy to imagine how other people view things if I make the effort (regardless of whether they agree with me or not), maybe you could just ask them why they don't agree with you and discuss it (not argue, discuss), that could work.



causalset said:


> The other example was in my math class last semester. A guy in that class had bipolar and he was falling asleep in class. I sent him an email trying to persuade him to go off the meds. He said he would consider it, and I thought he was just being polite. Then later I learned that he dropped out because he oversleepted a midterm. I tried to challenge his decision to drop out and he was responding that he was just a ****ty student. So I told him that he is not a ****ty student it was the meds that screwed him over, and he said that actually he was off the meds when he oversleeped (although I have no idea whether he went off the meds due to my advice or if he decided it on his own). In any case I kept trying to persuade him to go back to school, but he just got mad at me for pushing my view on him and stopped replying.


That was a little myopic. I can see your line of reasoning, he's having difficulties because he is always tired, he's tired because of his medication therefore if he stops his medication he won't be tired and his difficulties will be gone. However if you had thought about it a little longer you should eventually ask yourself "are there any reasons he shouldn't stop taking his medication?". The obvious answer would be that he could go into either a severe depressive or manic state, you would have to weigh this up against being tired and decide which is the greater evil. Personally if I reached out to someone like that I would probably tell them that they should talk to their doctor and tell them the side effects of the medication are causing problems, they might be able to recommend something else.



causalset said:


> As you see both of those people were male, so I had nothing to gain out of telling them to go to school or get off the meds. So I do care about others. It is just that I can't relate to them having priorities different from mine. Thats why if they talk about things I can't relate to such as jewelry it comes across like I don't care. But if I were to increase my life experience I would be able to relate to things that don't match my exact perspective.


I'm not suggesting you're a bad person. It's just that you're going to struggle to understand the perspective of others unless you make an effort to do so, that means listening to and trying to understand *them* not trying to convince them to agree with *you*. That doesn't mean you'll agree with them but you'll at least have a better understanding of where they're coming from.


----------



## kageri (Oct 2, 2014)

I'm not reading all that in detail much less the walls of text in this thread. Strike 1 = walls of text. You know how annoying people who can't wait for a response and assume bad things when you are just busy can be? Also, you know how annoying long *** text messages are when you are busy and just sending short answers? Both are enough that you break off contact with them if you don't have a prior history. You came off insecure and needy while being inconvenient to have to answer promptly or face your melt down of negative assumptions that you actually voiced. You aren't even officially in a relationship yet and you are throwing out insecurities about simple delays in responses while throwing out every detail of your life. Soon I would label you crazy, potential stalker, psycho that is too risky to meet up. Depending who else I have lined up as a possible relationship you might get another day or 2 to prove your initial impression was a temporary moment of nervousness and not a sign of how the whole relationship would go.


----------



## eddyr (Aug 1, 2011)

kageri said:


> I'm not reading all that in detail much less the walls of text in this thread. Strike 1 = walls of text. You know how annoying people who can't wait for a response and assume bad things when you are just busy can be? Also, you know how annoying long *** text messages are when you are busy and just sending short answers? Both are enough that you break off contact with them if you don't have a prior history. You came off insecure and needy while being inconvenient to have to answer promptly or face your melt down of negative assumptions that you actually voiced. You aren't even officially in a relationship yet and you are throwing out insecurities about simple delays in responses while throwing out every detail of your life. Soon I would label you crazy, potential stalker, psycho that is too risky to meet up. Depending who else I have lined up as a possible relationship you might get another day or 2 to prove your initial impression was a temporary moment of nervousness and not a sign of how the whole relationship would go.


Very true. Even as a guy I can see this, I don't need to be a girl. Seeing your own mistakes is hard though... who is perfect?


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> Because I overheard his conversation with professor where he told him he falls asleep in class due to meds.
> 
> Apart from that, I read that in the past meds were called "chemical lobotomy" which were their original purpose rather than side effect: kind of like if computer says 3+3=4 just hit it with a hammer then it wont be able to say anything at all, including 3+3=4, and the fact that it won't be able to do anythign else well its just side effect. I totally don't agree with this approach thats why I am against meds in general.
> 
> Now I don't usually push my view on people but like I said I felt bad he was falling asleep in class. Now I fall asleep too but in my case its because I study late hours, so at least I am trying not to do it. But in his case its like he tries to ruin his brain on purpose. Kind of like deliberately staying up all night doing nothing just to make sure he would be sleepy for its own sake because, you know, sleepy people are more managible. I mean for first several weeks I tried really hard not to say anything, but it was just too painful to watch so eventually I sent him that email.


Again, as LonelyLurker said, those meds were probably keeping him from having manic or depressive episodes, and he should have spoken to his doctor about the side effects.

Think of it this way - if you broke your leg, the doctor would give you painkillers. The purpose of those painkillers is to numb your nerves so you aren't in excruciating pain the whole time it's healing. So are you not gonna take the painkillers because you might stub your toe and not feel it?


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

constant calling or texting, not responding fast enough, yup, unfortuneately that bothers women more than men


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Okay as an update, the conversation I talked about in original post happened in Jan 18-19, and then she contacted me again on Jan 29. We texted for few hours but then it looked like she was offended over my not getting all excited about certain singer and I haven't heard from her since. Do you think its in fact the case or do you think something else is the reason I never heard from her again? Anyway since the chatlog is too long I will give you just beginning and an end.



> Her: How are you?
> Me: Doing homework, how are you?
> Her: I've been good. Watching Batman. Having some beers.
> Me: Thats good.
> ...


Like I said we then texted for few hours and things were fine. Now here is the end of the chatlog where it went downhill due to my not being excited about a singer:



> Her: Do you want to hear something that I heard young that helped me not give a sh*t?
> Me: (writing several paragraph continuation to my wall of text I started previously about some girl)
> Me: (Sorry I had to finish typing this. So what is it you were going to share that helped you not to care?)
> Her: Well that's a simple misunderstanding (in reference to girl part)
> ...


----------



## SofaKing (May 9, 2014)

Yeah, she was really passionate about something and you basically reacted, several times, as if it was irrelevant. Not good.

When you read this back (and other threads you've shared) does it strike you as being fairly self-centered? Just something to think about since any partner won't want to feel like they don't matter if you're only trying to apply what is talked about to yourself.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

SofaKing said:


> Yeah, she was really passionate about something and you basically reacted, several times, as if it was irrelevant. Not good.
> 
> When you read this back (and other threads you've shared) does it strike you as being fairly self-centered? Just something to think about since any partner won't want to feel like they don't matter if you're only trying to apply what is talked about to yourself.


As far as your last sentence about applying it to myself, I was talking to her about poor social skills for the whole hour before she brought up that singer (I didn't type it all here because of character limit). So if, after this conversation, she says "you know what helped me" and brings up that singer, then it seems pretty obvious she tries to apply it to my situation. Otherwise, why would she say "you know what helped me"?

And as far as not reacting to that singer, if she were to talk about some subject I am familiar with I would have reciprocated better. But rock is just not what I am into. Now I would gladly listen to rock in order to be with someone, I mean it costs me exactly nothing. But the problem is that I wasn't warned that rock is make it or break it deal. I thought liking rock is just something random, just like liking a certain food is random too.


----------



## SofaKing (May 9, 2014)

causalset said:


> As far as your last sentence about applying it to myself, I was talking to her about poor social skills for the whole hour before she brought up that singer (I didn't type it all here because of character limit). So if, after this conversation, she says "you know what helped me" and brings up that singer, then it seems pretty obvious she tries to apply it to my situation. Otherwise, why would she say "you know what helped me"?
> 
> And as far as not reacting to that singer, if she were to talk about some subject I am familiar with I would have reciprocated better. But rock is just not what I am into. Now I would gladly listen to rock in order to be with someone, I mean it costs me exactly nothing. But the problem is that I wasn't warned that rock is make it or break it deal. I thought liking rock is just something random, just like liking a certain food is random too.


While you may have explained your behavior to me, your conversation comes off differently.

Perception is fact in human relations. Intent is only as good as it is perceived.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

SofaKing said:


> While you may have explained your behavior to me, your conversation comes off differently.
> 
> Perception is fact in human relations. Intent is only as good as it is perceived.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


But in her case I wouldn't even have to explain it since SHE was part of that conversation that I haven't posted so she knew, just as well as I did, that we been talking specifically about my problems right up until the time when she said "you know what helped me" and brought up that singer. So, within that context, wouldn't it be obvious for her that I would take "you know what helped me" as intended to make a link between the singer and myself?


----------



## SofaKing (May 9, 2014)

causalset said:


> But in her case I wouldn't even have to explain it since SHE was part of that conversation that I haven't posted so she knew, just as well as I did, that we been talking specifically about my problems right up until the time when she said "you know what helped me" and brought up that singer. So, within that context, wouldn't it be obvious for her that I would take "you know what helped me" as intended to make a link between the singer and myself?


Blaming her for not understanding you isn't a solution.

I'm giving you what could have been perceived.

I hesitate to repeat some prior feedback I've given, but you're proving this out in the thread and our dialogue. Your intelligence is getting in the way and you can be exhausting to interact with as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

SofaKing said:


> Blaming her for not understanding you isn't a solution.
> 
> *I'm giving you what could have been perceived. *


Well I am trying to understand *why* its being perceived that way. I mean, if right in the middle of both of us talking about myself she says "you know what helped me" and mentions singer, why would it look like anything OTHER THAN her wanting to connect that singer to myself?


----------



## SofaKing (May 9, 2014)

We aren't her. Human perception isn't consistent. I already gave you a guess on how I perceived it.

Nothing more I can add.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## Overdrive (Sep 19, 2015)

A lot of ME with big answers.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

SofaKing said:


> We aren't her. Human perception isn't consistent. I already gave you a guess on how I perceived it.
> 
> Nothing more I can add.


Okay fine I will make my own guess to help you out. So do you think the phrase "you know what helped me" was meant to be "polite" as in since I wanted to talk about me it would be "polite" to pretend that she wanted to do that too when in fact she didn't? And do you think that she expected me to know that the phrase "you know what helped me" was only meant to be polite. Since I didn't know that, but she thought I would, thats where the mishap might have occurred?


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Okay fine I will make my own guess to help you out. So do you think the phrase "you know what helped me" was meant to be "polite" as in since I wanted to talk about me it would be "polite" to pretend that she wanted to do that too when in fact she didn't? And do you think that she expected me to know that the phrase "you know what helped me" was only meant to be polite. Since I didn't know that, but she thought I would, thats where the mishap might have occurred?


Your mistake was not recognising that by telling you what helped her, she was also revealing that she needed help at one stage of her life (asking you if you minded if she shared was a clue that what was about to follow was important). It would have been good to ask her how she struggled, if she felt like an outcast once, if so why, does she feel better now, that sort of thing. Basically just showing that even though you have problems, you understand that she may have problems too, that you care about her problems and that you would like to help her with them in the same way she tried to help you, essentially that you care.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> Your mistake was not recognising that by telling you what helped her, she was also revealing that she needed help at one stage of her life. It would have been good to ask her how she struggled, if she felt like an outcast once, if so why, does she feel better now, that sort of thing. Basically just showing that even though you have problems, you understand that she may have problems too, that you care about her problems and that you would like to help her with them in the same way she tried to help you, essentially that you care.


Actually her being an outcast is what we talked about during the phone conversation I mentioned in the original post, that happened 10 days before the one I am talking about now. From what she told me she had an anxiety, she also had some mood disorder (don't remember if it was bipolar or depression) she also been to an abusive relationship, and also that she has no friends just like I don't. But like I said that is what we talked about in the original phone conversation, 10 days before the one I am discussing now. Its true though that maybe she wanted to talk about it more, but it didn't follow from the context.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> Actually her being an outcast is what we talked about during the phone conversation I mentioned in the original post, that happened 10 days before the one I am talking about now. From what she told me she had an anxiety, she also had some mood disorder (don't remember if it was bipolar or depression) she also been to an abusive relationship, and also that she has no friends just like I don't. But like I said that is what we talked about in the original phone conversation, 10 days before the one I am discussing now. Its true though that maybe she wanted to talk about it more, but it didn't follow from the context.


I think maybe she was hoping her example would make something click for you. Not necessarily with Marilyn Manson, but maybe you'd realize that there was something like that in your own life.

Also, if you're hoping to date this girl, I'd give up on that. Stick to friendship.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> Also, if you're hoping to date this girl, I'd give up on that. Stick to friendship.


Why is that?


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> Why is that?


Because:



> Her: The sex thing is a concern. I believe sex is incredibly important when it comes to intimacy. It's a totally different aspect wherein you can be entirely yourself and open. It's something to be shared. It's a vulnerable spot.


Neither of you are likely to compromise on that issue (nor should you), so you're clearly not compatible as a couple.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Actually her being an outcast is what we talked about during the phone conversation I mentioned in the original post, that happened 10 days before the one I am talking about now. From what she told me she had an anxiety, she also had some mood disorder (don't remember if it was bipolar or depression) she also been to an abusive relationship, and also that she has no friends just like I don't. But like I said that is what we talked about in the original phone conversation, 10 days before the one I am discussing now. Its true though that maybe she wanted to talk about it more, but it didn't follow from the context.


Just because you've talked about something before doesn't necessarily mean they will never need/want to talk about it again, based on her response I would say that she was probably looking for comforting/reassurance/validation. To be fair to you you did try to ask her eventually but the way you worded it makes it sound like you're only doing it out of a sense of obligation as opposed to any genuine desire (even if that's not the case). She could have made it easier for you once you asked but she may have already been offended at that point.

I wouldn't say the fault is entirely yours.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> Just because you've talked about something before doesn't necessarily mean they will never need/want to talk about it again


That part is self obvious: if that issue is big in her life I would expect it would come up over and over. But like I said within the CONTEXT of that PARTICULAR conversation it wasn't clear at all. That particular conversation was about me, and then she came up with something that looked like an example (presumably in reference to what I said about me).



LonelyLurker said:


> She could have made it easier for you once you asked but she may have already been offended at that point.


Precisely. And this turns things into self fulfilling prophecies. When she was offended I couldn't have possibly been talking about her rather than me. I mean, suppose someone dies and suppose you are falsely accused of murdering that person. Now, would you express concern for the fact that they died or would you be focused on redeeming yourself from false accusation? Once someone calls you selfish its pretty hard not to be.

Its true though that I was selfish at first. But actually calling me selfish without giving any way out is pretty much locking me up in that state. And then they say "see we were right you don't change" well only because you locked me up in that state where I can't change by labeling me.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> Because:
> 
> Neither of you are likely to compromise on that issue (nor should you), so you're clearly not compatible as a couple.


If you re-read it she did ask for more details on things I am open to and I mentioned that I touched girl's breasts. The fact that we stayed on the sex subject for another 15 minutes or so, and then talked about other subjects for another few hours, indicates she wasn't turned off by that. Its the singer thing at the end that turned her off.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> If you re-read it she did ask for more details on things I am open to and I mentioned that I touched girl's breasts. The fact that we stayed on the sex subject for another 15 minutes or so, and then talked about other subjects for another few hours, indicates she wasn't turned off by that. Its the singer thing at the end that turned her off.


Yes, what it likely means is she's curious about your sexual history, and is happy to be your friend (since friends don't need to be sexually compatible). It would be highly unlikely that she would decide that sex is no longer important to her, just as it would be highly unlikely you would agree to sex before marriage.


----------



## andy0128 (Dec 19, 2003)

From reading your opening post two things stuck out for me. I wouldn't tell her about aspergers and secondly you are taking it way too seriously. If the woman is slow to respond then wait a day or two. Don't bombard her with messages and secondly don't pester her about why she hasn't responded or let on you are panicking she lost interest.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Precisely. And this turns things into self fulfilling prophecies. When she was offended I couldn't have possibly been talking about her rather than me. I mean, suppose someone dies and suppose you are falsely accused of murdering that person. Now, would you express concern for the fact that they died or would you be focused on redeeming yourself from false accusation? Once someone calls you selfish its pretty hard not to be.
> 
> Its true though that I was selfish at first. But actually calling me selfish without giving any way out is pretty much locking me up in that state. And then they say "see we were right you don't change" well only because you locked me up in that state where I can't change by labeling me.


It sounds like you're going to need someone who's either similar to you (in terms of the way you see things) or is very patient and understanding in order to have a successful relationship. You'll probably run into issues like this until you meet someone like that, it doesn't sound like she's one of those people.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

andy0128 said:


> From reading your opening post two things stuck out for me. *I wouldn't tell her about aspergers* and secondly you are taking it way too seriously. If the woman is slow to respond then wait a day or two. Don't bombard her with messages and secondly don't pester her about why she hasn't responded or let on you are panicking she lost interest.


The first time I told her about Asperger was in our phone conversation I mentioned in the opening post, and I did that in response to her question as to whether I have friends. In response to that she said that one of her friends has Asperger's too. In any case, one thing she said in the text conversation I had with her 10 days later was that she was frustrated that Asperger guy refused to take her to karaoke. I am wondering whether this was what prompted her to text me? Although apparently she was talking to that guy at the same time she was saying that he was correcting her that he didn't mean to be mean the way she said to me that he was.

But no she isn't dating that guy she was referring to him as a friend.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> It sounds like you're going to need someone who's either similar to you (in terms of the way you see things) or is very patient and understanding in order to have a successful relationship. You'll probably run into issues like this until you meet someone like that, it doesn't sound like she's one of those people.


Well how many years would it take to run into such a person? I am already 37. Not that it matters: I wouldn't want to spent years before finding a relationship in the 20-s either.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Well how many years would it take to run into such a person? I am already 37. Not that it matters: I wouldn't want to spent years before finding a relationship in the 20-s either.


Unfortunately I couldn't possibly answer that question for you but I hope you find them.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> Unfortunately I couldn't possibly answer that question for you but I hope you find them.


Well thats precisely why I should change instead. I mean how about this: I have some things I admit I can't change such that

1. I will never have sex before marriage
2. I can't approach women myself they have to approach me first
3. I am afraid of dogs

but then there are also things that I CAN change, such as

1. I CAN learn to talk about other people's interests not just mine
2. I CAN try to stop being clingy if it means I will have some attention rather than none at all
3. I CAN start paying more attention to how I dress
4. I CAN stop obsessing if I get a girlfriend since then I won't have much to obsess about

So I wish people could give me a chance when it comes to things I CAN change. I realize that them agreeing with this concept already requires them to be "similar to me" as you put it, but if they could agree with just this one thing I could change a whole lot more of other things.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Well thats precisely why I should change instead. I mean how about this: I have some things I admit I can't change such that
> 
> 1. I will never have sex before marriage
> 2. I can't approach women myself they have to approach me first
> ...


The reason that might be difficult is that if you don't know what you're doing wrong they're going to have to do more than give you a chance, they're going to have to teach you. It's going to be more difficult to find people who would be willing (or even able) to make that kind of an investment in someone.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> The reason that might be difficult is that if you don't know what you're doing wrong they're going to have to do more than give you a chance, they're going to have to teach you. It's going to be more difficult to find people who would be willing *(or even able)* to make that kind of an investment in someone.


As far as "able" part, maybe part of the reason it appears difficult is that I keep arguing on this board. But here is a good news: if the girl will tell me "okay I will date you if you do this or that differently" I won't be arguing with her as to how unfair she is, I will simply do it. The reason I am arguing is that nobody gives me an option to DO something so my only option is to argue as to how unfair various people in the past have been. But if someone were to actually give me a chance or direct me to someone who would, then all the arguing would stop.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

even some coaches, or dating guru's will say that being needy, desperate is a needy, feminine thing, which bothers me a lot


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> As far as "able" part, maybe part of the reason it appears difficult is that I keep arguing on this board. But here is a good news: if the girl will tell me "okay I will date you if you do this or that differently" I won't be arguing with her as to how unfair she is, I will simply do it. The reason I am arguing is that nobody gives me an option to DO something so my only option is to argue as to how unfair various people in the past have been. But if someone were to actually give me a chance or direct me to someone who would, then all the arguing would stop.


Well, it's a bit of a catch 22. Women (men too, but it seems to be more pronounced with women) don't just want you to do "X", they want you to want to do "X". If they have to tell you to do something then much of the value is lost as they may believe that the only reason you're doing it is because they *told* you to not because you *want* to.

It's an important emotional distinction.

Now, if you're not even aware of "X" then you won't have a desire to do it. The only way around that would be to try and understand why "X" is desirable to them (hopefully you would have a desire to fulfill the underlying need) and find someone who is capable of:

1) knowing the underlying need that drives the desire for "X" and knowing the link between "X" and that underlying need.
2) successfully communicating that link to you.
3) wanting to do this with you even though they might not have to do so with other people.

If you did find someone who could explain these things to you it wouldn't be necessary to simply do things because they've told you to, even though you think it's unfair. This isn't something that's unique to you, I see it in many relationships, your problem is that it's more pronounced in comparison to an average person.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> Well, it's a bit of a catch 22. Women (men too, but it seems to be more pronounced with women) don't just want you to do "X", they want you to want to do "X". If they have to tell you to do something then much of the value is lost as they may believe that the only reason you're doing it is because they *told* you to not because you *want* to.


Yeah I thought about it a lot and it is frustrating in several levels. When they are articulating what you just said they act as if they are so super-concerned about me, they don't want me to feel discomfort by changing who I am, etc. I mean they aren't telling me THEY want to feel approval by knowing I want to do it. Nope. They are telling me its *ME* who has to be comfortable and be the way I am! So since their concern is ME, why don't they listen to what I say that *I* don't care about said discomfort?! So they care about me even more than I care about myself!!! But if so, then why don't they care about the discomforts I DO claim I have: such as the discomfort of being single?! Apparently they think they know my needs better than I know them myself. The above disagreement with regards to what *MY* needs are goes hand in hand with the other disagreement when they are telling me that I can't be happy with others until I am happy with myself first (aka my needs go first, thus implying I shouldn't change) and my thinking that its the other way around: in order for me to be happy I have to be with someone (thus implying that I have to do whatever it takes to be with someone, including changing). Now, if BOTH of us are concerned about ME rather than them, why don't they trust me with regards to what MY needs are? Do they think I am not self aware or something? Or do they think I have multiple personalities?

Of course I can try and answer my own question. Maybe their concern is THEM rather than me, and they only claim that their concern is me in order to be polite. Now, their concern about THEM involves my approval of them, and if I am doing something because they tell me to rather than because I want to, that takes away of my approval of them hence doesn't meet THEIR needs. Okay, but then why don't they say it this way? They think that by pretending to worry about MY needs they are being polite, but actually they are doing just the opposite: they are hurting me even more because they are pretty much telling me I have multiple personalities.

But in any case, back on the topic: believe it or not, I myself wouldn't want a relationship that asks me to do something I REALLY don't want to do. Like for example if the girl were to threaten to break up with me due to my not wanting sex before marriage, then no I am not going to have sex in order to keep her, I will let her break up with me. And similarly if the girl were to break up with me because I insist on going to school for the sake of my job as a theoretical physics in indefinite future as opposed to getting out of school and getting an industry job in the here and now, then no I won't change plans to keep her either, I will let her break up as well. Whenever I claim I can change something for the girl it is always about something thats not very important. Like if the girl doesn't like my table manners, then sure I can change table manners, since I don't care one way or the other. She will claim that no I shouldn't change them since I should be who I am. But wait a second, didn't everyone had to change them, they just did that in a much younger age than me? So if its okay to ask little kids to change table manners why isn't it okay to ask an adult to change them?

And then there are other areas where I actually WANT to change FOR MYSELF but my wants are being misunderstood. So a couple of years ago in Baptist Student Union I was complaining how no one likes me and someone offered to pray for this. Now I don't normally pray for things like that: the only reason I am Christian is that I am afraid of going to hell when I die, but thats a different subject. But anyway since they wanted to pray I was like yeah you can pray, why not. Then they asked me what else do I want them to pray for; I said pray so that I can find a girlfriend. They didn't want to do it they said they will only pray for me finding friends. Well I got insulted but didn't say anything. But then when they did pray for me to to find friends they added something interesting: they prayed for me to find someone with whom I can talk about my life. I didn't say anything out loud but I thought to myself "Oh really?! Are you serious?! Don't you *****en understand that the only reason I want to talk about my *****en life is because I HAVE NO LIFE so all I have is the past to dwell on; and do you REALLY think I want to be in this state forever? Don't you *****en get that what I REALLY want is to get a life in here and now THAT INVOLVES OTHER PEOPLE NOT ME, so that I no longer HAVE to dwell in the past?! Don't you GET IT?!" Like I said I didn't even say any of that so the point is that I am not lying when I say that dwelling on my past 24/7 is NOT what I want. Thats the truth. Its simply that my HABBITS don't reflect my EMOTIONAL NEEDS.

And this brings me to the other point. So you say that the girl doesn't want me to do something because she wants to, she wants me to do it because *I* want to. So in other words she doesn't just care about actions, she also cares whats behind the actions. Well, if so, then how come if I tell her "the fact that I talk about myself all the time doesn't mean that thats what I want" she doesn't believe me? In the latter scenario she says "actions speak louder than words". Well if actions speak louder than words, why wouldn't you care if my "actions" become positive, why would then say they don't count because my supposed wants are different? Its like they want to have it both ways: if what I do is bad then actions is all that matters, but when what I do is good then its no longer about actions its about whats behind the actions. So which way is it?

I guess I can answer my own question by saying that men feel social pressure in order to put their best foot forward. And thats why when they show their best foot then the question is "is the best foot legit or are they putting it forward because they are pressured to" and, on the other hand, no one has a pressure to put worst foot forward and therefore when worst foot does go forward people believe it whatever the worst foot happens to be. Well in my case I am not like that. In my case I am brutally honest and I make no effort to put best foot forward *UNTIL* I am confronted with some sort of consequences regarding my worst foot that I want to undo. And HERE IS SOMETHING IRONIC: once this happens, people are telling me "oh no you have to be who you are". But in actuality I am A LOT MORE genuine than most people: you see most people put their best foot forward from the first second of interaction, while I wait to do it until something goes wrong. So its me who is actually doing LESS of pretending. Yet, ironically, its also me who is told I am doing TOO MUCH of pretending. Why? Because if I pretend 10% of the time then during those 10% I am being caught with being inconsistent with the other 90% of the time, whereas if someone else pretends 100% of the time then they are consistent so they don't get caught. Now of course you can say that the person I am speaking to isn't the mind reader. But the only problem with this is that SHE HERSELF prentends 100% of the time TOO. So when she is telling me I have to be who I am and not pretend she is being hypocritical and she knows it.

I maxed out of characters, so this was the first half of my message and the second half of my message is in response below


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Okay like I said I maxed out of characters. So here comes the second part of my message

By the way do you think that political correctness is to blame for my problems? Here is an interesting analogy to think about. Take for example the fact that in modern day society its illegal to do conversion therapy for homosexuality (like I said elsewhere, I am straight, so this is strictly an analogy). This is, supposedly, meant to help gays so that they won't be "forced" into being straight. Except for one problem: what if gay, himself, happens to want to go through conversion therapy and he is told he isn't allowed to. Then, ironically enough, his right is being taken away from him BY supposed pro-gay liberals! The rational behind this is that they claim that if gay person wants conversion therapy he doesn't "truly" want one, rather he was brainwashed into wanting it. And now lets compare the situation of the gay person just discussed to the situation of straight person with Asperger. So in case of straight person with Asperger, when I say that "I want to change my ways and stop talking about myself so much but rather talk about other people" I am told I shouldn't change myself DESPITE my stated want to change. Why? Because they assume that my want to change isn't internally motivated but rather motivated by external pressures. Now do you see the analogy? A gay person is turned down when it comes to conversion therapy, and I am being turned donw when it comes to stopping talking about myself, for the same exact reason: people claim that the motive to change is externally motivated! And there is one more analogy. There are some people who claim to be cured of homosexuality. Now, I am not going to discuss whether I believe they are in fact cured or not, that is besides the point. The only thing that is relevant is what liberals say in the response: and what liberals say is "no they weren't cured, they only tell themselves that they are". The logical equivalence of that statement is "no they don't like opposite gender, they only tell themselves that they do". And now lets go back to the situation of straight person with Asperger. So I say "I WANT to talk about other people, not just myself" and I am being told "no you don't really want it, you are only telling yourself that you do". See the analogy? By the way have you seen the movie called "Breaking Code" regarding gay mathematician Turing who lived at the time when homosexuality was criminal offence? There was an episode in that movie when a woman was trying to get him to love her and he was telling her he was gay. When I watched that part I couldn't help but think "oh lucky man! He openly tells her he doesn't like her yet she persists. But in my case I actually like girls and try to tell them that I do, but they don't believe me". Now, in light of the above analogies, maybe people's mindset back then was different than right now and back then, apart from being willing to change gay people into straights, they were also willing to change asperger people into normal? And just like women were chasing after gay men trying to convert them, in the same way women were chasing after Asperger men as well? Even if not, at the very least, I know that if I were to live back then no one would have rebuffed me with the line "you have to be who you are" back then that concept was unheard of. If I were to tell women back then I will change (even though I am already straight and what I want to change is my Asperger) they would have believed me! So even though the society back then is said to be "more discriminating" in reality the modern society is the one that discriminates. The modern society basically tells people to be losers because there is nothing wrong with being losers its who they are, and when a loser wants to stop being a loser he is being rebuffed just like a gay person who wants conversion therapy is being rebuffed, perfect parallel.



LonelyLurker said:


> Now, if you're not even aware of "X" then you won't have a desire to do it. The only way around that would be to try and understand why "X" is desirable to them (hopefully you would have a desire to fulfill the underlying need)


Okay let me correct myself. Yes I need to understand what is behind their desire -- in fact the lack of explanation is the main reason why I weren't doing what they wanted, you are right. But at the same time there are many different levels of understanding. If I am in a situation where I am in a position to DO something about it, then probably 5 minute explanation would be enough to get me to see why I should do it, even if I don't "fully" agree, I would still see from their point of view why I should do it, and do it. But if I am in a situation when I am not given such chance and I have no choice but sit and whine about the past failures, then I would need to understand it on a much better level in order not to be pissed at the situation, and then I would sit and argue about it for hours, days, months, on end.

Let me give you an example. So 15 years ago I was sleeping at the restaurant and a couple of times I was told that I should wake up. It didn't make sense to me why I can't sleep at the restaurants, but since I was told I can't, I didn't. I did, however, went on message boards and post threads asking why can't I sleep in the restaurants, and spent probably around a week or two debating the topic, without fully being convinced. But, even though I weren't convinced, I dropped the subject after a week or two. You might say it was still a long time, but that is not nearly as long time as SEVERAL YEARS that I spent debating the topic as to why don't girls like me. So why did I debate restaurant topic only for a couple of weeks and debate girls topic for several years, despite the fact that I didn't get satisfactory answer on either one? Reason is simple: with restaurants I know what to DO so that it won't affect me PERSONALLY any more, but with girls it still affects me personally: even if I change my course of actions entirely girls still won't talk to me because they remember the way I was in the past. So THAT is what drives me to keep perseveratting with those endless questions. See what I mean? If the restaurants were to ban me for those couple of times when I tried to sleep there, then I would be talking for several years about that, too. But they didn't ban me. I stopped sleeping there, problem solved. I wish I could do something like that with girls.

But in any case, back to the point you were making, you are actually onto something when it comes to wanting to do something when I have an explanation. And this brings me right back to the other question: why do girls simply assume I don't want to do it period? If the girl says that she wants me to care about her because I love her rather than because she threatens to leave then I get it. But, like you imply, the issue is NOT that I don't love her, the issue is that I don't see a connection between something apparently meaningless and loving her. So yes I love her all along, she doesn't have to tell me to love her; she only has to tell me about that connection and once I see a connection I would do whatever it is she wants me to do. Or are you saying the girls simply don't get that its possible not to see that connection and when I claim I didn't see it they think I was lying? Let me give you an example. So I, personally, like cherry pie better than apple pie. Suppose girl likes apple pie better, but I didn't know that. So if I give her cherry pie, will she assume I don't love her, or will she simply realize that I didn't know what her tastes were? Well I wish girls knew that with other things the situation is pretty similar.

*And, last but not least, here is something REALLY interesting* So you said women don't want me to do something that isn't being motivated by my own intrinsic wants. But what about the following hypothetical. Suppose I do everything perfectly and she was always happy about me, and then I tell her I have Asperger. But you see there is a theory that people with Asperger aren't capable of true love. So, on the basis of label of Asperger ALONE she decides I didn't truly want to do what I did, and dump me. Do you think this outcome of revealing a diagnosis is common? And, if so, don't you see how very wrong that would be?


----------



## sad1231234 (Jul 10, 2016)

She might have thoughr you sounded needy/clingy. Anyway, she doesnt seem like a very nice person to me.


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

I'll try to expand on what LonelyLurker was getting at with girls wanting a man to want to do "X."

Lately I've been going to bars/clubs to drink and dance. When I dance with girls I make it a point to lead them in various ways. Because I know girls value a man who can be dominant. So how does this concept apply to dancing? Well, while dancing I do various gestures on my own accord without her prompting. If we've been dancing for a bit with her facing me, I'll grab her body and gently but firmly turn her around. After dancing in that position for a bit, I'll turn them back around. Sometimes I'll pull them in super close with our bodies practically glued together. Or I'll lead her hand and guide her into a 360 spin. And then cup the side of her head and lean in like I'm going in for a kiss.

The point is that I'm letting her know that I'm a guy who is capable of taking control, not just some static, passive dance pole. Of course her comfort level is something I'm constantly paying attention to. For example last night at a club I cupped a girls head a few times while we were dancing. I intended to go for a kiss but she the first two times I felt that she kept her distance. Which is no problem, as long as she doesn't actively push me away I just try again later. I don't even think of this as two failed moves. In fact, I suspect the sexual tension went up a notch because I planted the idea of kissing in her mind. The third time I cupped her head, we kissed.

If she had to overtly tell me to lead her while dancing I'm not so sure if she would have danced with me as long as she did or kiss me. Shes a girl; she wants a man who has the courage to take control. That said, she would never actually overtly tell me to lead her. Instead, she would just stop dancing with me. And if I were to ask her why did she stop dancing with me, she would probably give me some random flimsy excuse like: "I need to get back to my friends" or "I need to use the restroom," She _won't_ tell me that the real reason why she lost interest was because I wasn't leading her. It may seem silly that she wouldn't actually tell me the real reason. But in fact, using subtext, she _already _told me the real reason why she lost interest - that flimsy excuse and her actions. It's just that social intelligence is needed to decipher that flimsy excuse and her action of leaving me on the dance floor alone.

I hope this helps.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Qolselanu said:


> I'll try to expand on what LonelyLurker was getting at with girls wanting a man to want to do "X."
> 
> Lately I've been going to bars/clubs to drink and dance. When I dance with girls I make it a point to lead them in various ways. Because I know girls value a man who can be dominant. So how does this concept apply to dancing? Well, while dancing I do various gestures on my own accord without her prompting. If we've been dancing for a bit with her facing me, I'll grab her body and gently but firmly turn her around. After dancing in that position for a bit, I'll turn them back around. Sometimes I'll pull them in super close with our bodies practically glued together. Or I'll lead her hand and guide her into a 360 spin. And then cup the side of her head and lean in like I'm going in for a kiss.
> 
> ...


Well in my case girls aren't telling me "yes I know want to do this or that but I want the man who can take control and you don't". Rather they are telling me "it seems like you don't want to do it". Thats what is so frustrating. In the former situation at least they have their facts right, but in the latter situation they don't know the FACTS of what I feel and don't believe me when I am trying to convey them.


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

causalset said:


> Well in my case girls aren't telling me "yes I know want to do this or that but I want the man who can take control and you don't". Rather they are telling me "it seems like you don't want to do it". Thats what is so frustrating. In the former situation at least they have their facts right, but in the latter situation they don't know the FACTS of what I feel and don't believe me when I am trying to convey them.


In what context do they tell you "it seems like you don't want to do it?"


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Qolselanu said:


> In what context do they tell you "it seems like you don't want to do it?"


There was one girl who decided that I don't have a concept of love because I told her that the reason I like her is that she has Ph.D. and also how I was judging my past relationships based on fame/status of women. But you see those things are very common. The REAL reason she thought I don't have concept of love is that I told her I have Asperger so she thought that people with Asperger don't have concept of love. Then after I made protestations that it wasn't the case, she claimed to believe me but then, few hours later, when I mentioned those other things then I was at the square 1 again because she took them as confirmation of her idea that I can't feel love.

Then there was a different girl whom I talked to much longer than that one. In her case I knew her for few years. The first time I talked to her she said we can only be friends because she doesn't want to do long distance, which was fine with me. Then she was in an abusive relationship with someone who turned out to be sex offender and I was being there for her emotionally. As a result she started to feel something towards me, but I didn't have guts to reciprocate it unless/until she tells me bluntly. Instead I was talking about my own relationships. And then after trying to be touchy feely for few months she gave up and when she gave up it got my attention and then I was the one interogating her as to why she gave up. She said that she thinks she wants to be with an artist rather than scientist since artists can feel more. But I was like "hello, it has nothing to do with scientist or artist, it has to do with the fact that I acted like a brick wall AND I KNEW IT, and precisely because I KNEW I was being a brick wall I also know that in my ACTUAL relationsihps I was FAR more emotional" but she didn't seem to believe me. Also since scientists don't all act like brick walls I suspect she was being polite, I think by "scientist" she REALLY meant "someone with Asperger and people with Asperger can't feel love". So I was telling her "hey I DO feel love, I just don't have COURAGE to express it unless you make it BLANTLY clear". I don't think she believed me. But she avoided explaining why she didn't believe me and instead she was deterring on things like she doesn't do long distance and also that when she felt love she didn't really feel it rather her mind was clouded due to being abused by sex offender. But how does she know that she was "seeing whats not there" as she put it? The only reason it wasn't there is that I didn't reciprocate it but hey I felt it I just didn't have courage to reciprocate it thats all.

And, speaking of Asperger, if I go back to the girls I ACTUALLY dated they all seemed to assume I don't want to socialize with their friends when actually I did. Also the first one of my ex-s assumed I don't want to be taken to where its loud because she read that people with Asperger have sensory issues and she didn't believe me when I was telling her that I don't.

And speaking of people I interact right now, such as students on campus, when I ask why don't they approach me I am often told that they think I don't want to be approached because I act antisocial but actually I do want to be approached I just don't have guts to approach them myself.

The other thing that seem to hint in that direction is that I am told "why do you care what people think" which seems to imply that I don't have an INNATE need to socialize but I only want to socialize because I care about their opinion. Like in one of those times I complained about not having social life I was told "well you are taking 4 graduate level classes you don't have time". Well if I didn't have time, I would know myself without the need to be told. So apparently he "told me" about my not having time in order to "help me out" as far as making up an excuse if someone ever asks me why I am always by myself. What didn't seem to occur to him is that my concern has nothing to do with what excuse to make, my concern is that I actually WANT to socialize, but apparently he thinks otherwise.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Yeah I thought about it a lot and it is frustrating in several levels. When they are articulating what you just said they act as if they are so super-concerned about me, they don't want me to feel discomfort by changing who I am, etc. I mean they aren't telling me THEY want to feel approval by knowing I want to do it. Nope. They are telling me its *ME* who has to be comfortable and be the way I am! So since their concern is ME, why don't they listen to what I say that *I* don't care about said discomfort?!...


Your posts are too short, you should try to explain things in a little more detail (only joking, your posts are long though).:laugh:

My guess would be that we have been taught that being selfish is inherently negative, I personally believe that all actions not taken under duress are selfish and that selfishness is only of concern if you hurt others as a result. Being ashamed of being selfish is like being ashamed of using food to sustain your body, it just means you're human.

In order to get what you want you'd need someone who:

1) knows what they want (needs a low level of introspection)
2) knows why they want what they want (needs a high level of introspection)
3) is willing to admit that they need these things.

This is going to be difficult as it appears introspection is rarer than I would like it to be and many people are afraid to just admit to being selfish.

Ignore all of the "you don't need to change, you're perfect just the way you are" rhetoric, any mutually satisfactory relationship is going to need compromise. You need to recognise that there are things that you need, not want, but *need*, you also have to realise that there will be things that she needs, not wants, but *needs*. She should be cognisant of the same things and together you should be trying to meet each others *needs* while trying to get yours met too.

As for the actions speak louder than words line, I assume the only action that could satisfy her in that regard would be to show that you've learnt something and are showing improvement. If she doesn't give you the chance to show improvement then show it to the next woman in terms of making a better first impression.

I wouldn't say that political correctness is to blame though it does undoubtedly lead to people just lying in order to appear acceptable. I'd say it's more a result of the cult of self acceptance that has taken hold, this leads to people not accepting that they are in fact not perfect and could improve. It's like saying that we shouldn't treat cancer because cancer is simply part of what makes cancer sufferers who they are and as we all know, everyone is perfect just the way they are.:smile2:

If you were in a relationship, already provided evidence that you're a good partner and she rejected you due to a label then she's stupid. Why would you want to be with a stupid woman anyway? As for how common this would be, I have absolutely no idea, sorry.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

I can't believe I'm actually gonna do this.



causalset said:


> The above disagreement with regards to what *MY* needs are goes hand in hand with the other disagreement when they are telling me that I can't be happy with others until I am happy with myself first (aka my needs go first, thus implying I shouldn't change) and my thinking that its the other way around: in order for me to be happy I have to be with someone (thus implying that I have to do whatever it takes to be with someone, including changing). Now, if BOTH of us are concerned about ME rather than them, why don't they trust me with regards to what MY needs are? Do they think I am not self aware or something? Or do they think I have multiple personalities?


Have you ever tried to be something you're not? I have, for decades. It's emotionally draining and puts a strain on everyone around you. Changing yourself for other people isn't necessary unless your personality is dangerous and/or self-destructive.

You might as well ask why we tolerate temper tantrums from toddlers but not from adults. You know the answer to that; adults are supposed to have better control over what is socially acceptable, because they are taught these things as children. Children are taught that it's not polite to get angry in public, it's not polite to curse or lash out, it's not polite to discuss taboo subjects.

Let's take your idea of table manners. Children are taught good table manners because it's polite. In civilised societies, we expect children to have good table manners and therefore they don't need to be taught them as adults. Not everyone will care if you have bad table manners as an adult, so you don't *have* to change them. But if you want to be respectful to other people, then maybe figure out what you're doing wrong. I don't know what your table manners are like, ofc, so I can't say unequivocally.



> I am A LOT MORE genuine than most people: you see most people put their best foot forward from the first second of interaction, while I wait to do it until something goes wrong. So its me who is actually doing LESS of pretending. Yet, ironically, its also me who is told I am doing TOO MUCH of pretending. Why? Because if I pretend 10% of the time then during those 10% I am being caught with being inconsistent with the other 90% of the time, whereas if someone else pretends 100% of the time then they are consistent so they don't get caught. Now of course you can say that the person I am speaking to isn't the mind reader. But the only problem with this is that SHE HERSELF prentends 100% of the time TOO. So when she is telling me I have to be who I am and not pretend she is being hypocritical and she knows it.


Why do you assume other people pretend 100% of the time? What you're saying is that 90% of the time, you're not bothered about what impression you give, you don't care what people think or how you act? And you wonder why people don't want to hang out with you?



causalset said:


> By the way do you think that political correctness is to blame for my problems? Here is an interesting analogy to think about. Take for example the fact that in modern day society its illegal to do conversion therapy for homosexuality (like I said elsewhere, I am straight, so this is strictly an analogy). This is, supposedly, meant to help gays so that they won't be "forced" into being straight. Except for one problem: what if gay, himself, happens to want to go through conversion therapy and he is told he isn't allowed to. Then, ironically enough, his right is being taken away from him BY supposed pro-gay liberals! The rational behind this is that they claim that if gay person wants conversion therapy he doesn't "truly" want one, rather he was brainwashed into wanting it. And now lets compare the situation of the gay person just discussed to the situation of straight person with Asperger. So in case of straight person with Asperger, when I say that "I want to change my ways and stop talking about myself so much but rather talk about other people" I am told I shouldn't change myself DESPITE my stated want to change. Why? Because they assume that my want to change isn't internally motivated but rather motivated by external pressures. Now do you see the analogy? A gay person is turned down when it comes to conversion therapy, and I am being turned donw when it comes to stopping talking about myself, for the same exact reason: people claim that the motive to change is externally motivated!


No, political correctness is not to blame for your problems. There are plenty of organisations out there to help people with Aspergers, and the fact that more people are aware of the possible limitations you may have should be a good thing. The girl who wanted to help you avoid loud places was doing so because she cared about your well-being. Perhaps she didn't go about it the right way but she was trying.

The so-called political correctness surrounding Aspergers could be applied to social anxiety as well - it's about not pushing you into a box labelled 'Normal'. Political correctness expands the idea of normality. You no longer have to fit a cookie cutter ideal to be classed as an equal person. It's about recognising that not everybody acts the same way and some people need different support than others. Instead of conversion therapy (which is a barbaric practice), consider it being like a fear of heights. Nobody is going to force you to stand at the top of the Empire State Building if you say you have a fear of heights. But if you say "I'd like to get over this fear of heights", they might start suggesting ways that you could do so.

Addition that is irrelevant to this: Conversion therapy is, on the most basic level, like telling people red hair is immoral, then forcing all redheads to shave their hair off, beating them, sometimes killing them. Redheads could dye their hair and pretend they were never redheads, but it would be more humane to accept that some people have red hair and it doesn't change who they are as a person.



causalset said:


> There was one girl who decided that I don't have a concept of love because I told her that the reason I like her is that she has Ph.D. and also how I was judging my past relationships based on fame/status of women. But you see those things are very common. The REAL reason she thought I don't have concept of love is that I told her I have Asperger so she thought that people with Asperger don't have concept of love. Then after I made protestations that it wasn't the case, she claimed to believe me but then, few hours later, when I mentioned those other things then I was at the square 1 again because she took them as confirmation of her idea that I can't feel love.


We've been through this and you're assuming her reasons. This is not about your Aspergers, this is about you being cold and calculating when it comes to love. You don't fall in love with a job or an education, you don't fall in love with a title. You fall in love with a laugh or a smile; the way she blushes or how her fingers intertwine with yours. If those things are irrelevant to you then actually yeah, you would have done better in the age before political correctness, because you could have married for money or status or simply to have an heir.



> And then after trying to be touchy feely for few months she gave up and when she gave up it got my attention and then I was the one interogating her as to why she gave up. She said that she thinks she wants to be with an artist rather than scientist since artists can feel more.


Again, this is nothing to do with your Aspergers. This is because:

a) You ignored her advances, and
b) Artists are widely regarded as more creative, sensual people, whereas scientists are more analytical.

How do you expect other people to ignore your Aspergers when you make everything about it?


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> My guess would be that we have been taught that being selfish is inherently negative,


If people were taught it is inherently negative, why don't they agree with my goals of changing it? So they were taught not just that but something far worse: if someone does something thats negative, that person shouldn't be allowed to change their ways. Basically that person should be labeled as garbage for the negative things they did, and, as such, be FORCED to continue to do them. That is how it seems like when the people who DON"T LIKE my behavior are telling me "you have to be who you are" in response to my saying I want to change.



LonelyLurker said:


> In order to get what you want you'd need someone who:
> 
> 1) knows what they want (needs a low level of introspection)
> 2) knows why they want what they want (needs a high level of introspection)
> 3) is willing to admit that they need these things.


I totally agree. Now don't you think its common sense that people know? I mean yes they know it -- or else we wouldn't be having any successful couples out there! So then why are they acting like they think otherwise when they are telling me I should be who I am in response to my saying I want to change?



LonelyLurker said:


> This is going to be difficult as it appears introspection is rarer than I would like it to be and many people are afraid to just admit to being selfish.


Well they DO have successful relationships out there so apparently they are capable of such introspection. So why does it go out the window the moment they have to be dealing with someone like me?



LonelyLurker said:


> Ignore all of the "you don't need to change, you're perfect just the way you are" rhetoric, any mutually satisfactory relationship is going to need compromise.


I never said I was going to follow the "you don't need to change" advise. I am just trying to psychoanalyze the people that gave me that advise on the first place to see what must have been going through their heads that caused them to do it. And especially why does this advise come from women who reject me and they INSIST on this advise in order to continue to reject me.



LonelyLurker said:


> I wouldn't say that political correctness is to blame though it does undoubtedly lead to people just lying in order to appear acceptable. I'd say it's more a result of the cult of self acceptance that has taken hold,


But don't you realize that those two things are one and the same? Political correctness = cult of self acceptance applied to minorities. Disability puts me into a minority, so telling me I should accept my Asperger the way it is and not change it, thats political correctness right htere.



LonelyLurker said:


> If you were in a relationship, already provided evidence that you're a good partner and she rejected you due to a label then she's stupid. Why would you want to be with a stupid woman anyway? As for how common this would be, I have absolutely no idea, sorry.


No I am talking about the girls that rejected me before relationship started due to them knowing my label.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> Have you ever tried to be something you're not? I have, for decades. It's emotionally draining and puts a strain on everyone around you. Changing yourself for other people isn't necessary unless your personality is dangerous and/or self-destructive.





TheWelshOne said:


> Why do you assume other people pretend 100% of the time? What you're saying is that 90% of the time, you're not bothered about what impression you give, you don't care what people think or how you act? And you wonder why people don't want to hang out with you?


So you just contradicted yourself. In your first quote you said I shouldn't try to change who I am, and in the second quote you said that yes I should.

Maybe we are talking about different degrees of changing? So what about the following. My voice is naturally fast and loud and I don't put an effort to speak softly and quietly (when I tried to put an effort my mouth got tired after just few minutes of this). I naturally am not good in remembering names and faces, and I am not putting any effort in trying to remember them better. Sometimes I forget to say "hello", "goodbye", "please", "thank you", etc. When I have a train of thought and someone times to interrupt me I would continue to speak over them in order to finish my train of thought; and, on the other hand, when the other person has train of thought and I have some question/comment in the middle I would interrupt and speak over them. I also chew with my mouth open and sometimes when I eat I leave a mess. I talk about myself a lot (as you have noticed). If someone mentions something negative in their life that reminds me of something negative in my life I would more than likely mention the latter.

So how would you classify those things? As things I should change or things I shouldn't? Those are the sort of things that put people off but then when I tell them I will change they tell me "no don't change you have to be who you are". Do they REALLY mean I have to continue to do the above so that I can be who I am? I mean thats what they are telling me. AND this is the basis on which women reject me. They aren't buying that I will change BECAUSE they don't think I should. Now, back in the 60-s do you really think they would tell me "be who you are?" Nope, they will tell me I should change. Thats why I feel like back in the 60-s I would have been better off when it comes to promising to change since they wouldn't have had "politically correct" ideas to shoot down my promises with.



TheWelshOne said:


> You might as well ask why we tolerate temper tantrums from toddlers but not from adults. You know the answer to that; adults are supposed to have better control over what is socially acceptable, because they are taught these things as children. Children are taught that it's not polite to get angry in public, it's not polite to curse or lash out, it's not polite to discuss taboo subjects.


And I didn't do all that learning the kids were supposed to do. Thats why I want to learn those things as an adult.



TheWelshOne said:


> No, political correctness is not to blame for your problems. There are plenty of organisations out there to help people with Aspergers,


I am not talking about organizations that help people with Asperger. I am talking about the women trying to change me instead of walking away. The women tell me that I shouldn't have to change.

Okay let me give you a better illustration. So, as we all know, conversion therapy is outlawed because it is believed that gays don't want to do it out of their own will but rather they are being pressured to do it by society. But there is one more thing gays are pressured to do: they are pressured into entering heterosexual marriage. So the next logical step would be to make a registry of all the people that are gay and not allow any of the people in that registry to marry opposite gender in order to "protect them" from being "pressured" into doing it. In my case I am straight but the way my Asperger is treated is very similar to that: women refuse to date me in order to prevent me from being "pressured" into changing my table manners.

I understand you will tell me that my analogy between homosexuality and eating with my mouth open is ridiculous. But I am not the first one who made that analogy. Its all those other people that are telling me "you have to be who you are" each time I say "hey I can learn to eat with my mouth closed" (and yes all those girls that were rebuffing me with "be who you are" sounded EXACTLY the same way as liberals do with regards to gays -- I would have never thought of it if I didn't hear this line over and over). So apparently THEIR politically correct tolerant ideas cover both homosexuality and bad table manners in the same way. The only problem is that they have no interest in letting either of those two groups into heterosexual marriage; their only agenda is to enable them to be happy without the opposite gender partner.



TheWelshOne said:


> and the fact that more people are aware of the possible limitations you may have should be a good thing. The girl who wanted to help you avoid loud places was doing so because she cared about your well-being.


The only problem is that I don't have any sensory issues, yet she didn't believe me. Because you see, not everyone with Asperger have all the symptoms. Thats why I wish she could beleive me when I say I am doing just fine with the noise, but she didn't.

On the other hand, what DID cause me discomfort is the way I was ostracized by her friends, yet she had no concern about THAT. Her thinking about my sensory issues was a reason for her not to take me out to see her friends. But when I insisted and she did take me out, she didn't make any effort to include me, so I was just sitting there and she was talking to her friends while I felt like a third leg. I later learned from her that her friends were telling her to "stop dating r*tard" and one girl -- whom I never met -- asked her why would she want to "procreate r*tarded children" Perhaps she didn't go about it the right way but she was trying. When I confronted her with the question that, since that girl never saw me, it must have been something she said to her that would make her say it, she didn't even respond other than STOP. She never really apologized for it. She did tell me she stopped talking to that friend (well not really, maybe just sort of calling her less for few weeks) but when I asked her why didn't she stand up for me her answer was STOP.

Now during the first two months of a relationship she was a lot more respectful than that. All this started when she read up on Asperger. Thats part of why I am saying that autism awarenness is a bad thing.



TheWelshOne said:


> The so-called political correctness surrounding Aspergers could be applied to social anxiety as well - it's about not pushing you into a box labelled 'Normal'. Political correctness expands the idea of normality. You no longer have to fit a cookie cutter ideal to be classed as an equal person. It's about recognising that not everybody acts the same way and some people need different support than others. Instead of conversion therapy (which is a barbaric practice), consider it being like a fear of heights. Nobody is going to force you to stand at the top of the Empire State Building if you say you have a fear of heights. But if you say "I'd like to get over this fear of heights", they might start suggesting ways that you could do so.


The only problem with this is that -- as I mentioned earlier -- when I want to do something out of my own wishes, people are telling me that no I don't really want it I am being forced to do it. So, speaking of your analogy, suppose someone who is afraid of heights WANTS to go to the tower and learn not to be, but he is being stopped by people telling him "no you don't really want to learn to deal with heights so lets do something else" or "you should be the way you are, so lets do something else", etc. Well that is exactly what people are doing to me socially.



TheWelshOne said:


> We've been through this and you're assuming her reasons. This is not about your Aspergers, this is about you being cold and calculating when it comes to love. You don't fall in love with a job or an education, you don't fall in love with a title. You fall in love with a laugh or a smile; the way she blushes or how her fingers intertwine with yours. If those things are irrelevant to you then actually yeah, you would have done better in the age before political correctness, because you could have married for money or status or simply to have an heir.


Its not calculating. I mean I am not doing it because I want her to help me with physics. Not at all. Rather I want to improve my self esteem and I find physicist to be prestigious. Now its shallow, yes, but plenty of people are shallow. When people want to marry the sports star or whatever, no one says they don't have concept of love; yet they are saying it in my case.



TheWelshOne said:


> a) You ignored her advances


But why not let me reciprocate them later? Better late than never? This by the way is tied together with the rest of what I say about them not letting me change.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> If people were taught it is inherently negative, why don't they agree with my goals of changing it? So they were taught not just that but something far worse: if someone does something thats negative, that person shouldn't be allowed to change their ways. Basically that person should be labeled as garbage for the negative things they did, and, as such, be FORCED to continue to do them. That is how it seems like when the people who DON"T LIKE my behavior are telling me "you have to be who you are" in response to my saying I want to change.


They're just trying to be supportive, it's just that they're doing it in a cookie cutter way instead of actually trying to understand you and provide tailored support.

I'll give you a personal example. When I was younger I was fat, all of my family etc. would try to make me feel better by telling me that I wasn't fat, I knew that they were just trying to make me feel better but it actually did the opposite. It made me feel offended that they thought I was stupid enough not to know they weren't being genuine and let me know that I couldn't trust what they said to me because they were dishonest, it made me feel more alone and isolated.

However, I can only assume that most people don't react in this way or it wouldn't be so ubiquitous.



causalset said:


> I totally agree. Now don't you think its common sense that people know? I mean yes they know it -- or else we wouldn't be having any successful couples out there! So then why are they acting like they think otherwise when they are telling me I should be who I am in response to my saying I want to change?


Not necessarily, I don't think most people really take the time to look inwards, I think most just follow the examples they see around them and hope for the best.

Remember, I said that this is what *you* would need not what *everyone* would need. Other people can have successful relationships without these things, different people need different things.



causalset said:


> Well they DO have successful relationships out there so apparently they are capable of such introspection. So why does it go out the window the moment they have to be dealing with someone like me?


The difference is that you're less likely to provide what they want without their input. It's not that they necessarily have these qualities with others but that they don't need these qualities with others.



causalset said:


> I never said I was going to follow the "you don't need to change" advise. I am just trying to psychoanalyze the people that gave me that advise on the first place to see what must have been going through their heads that caused them to do it. And especially why does this advise come from women who reject me and they INSIST on this advise in order to continue to reject me.


They're just trying not to be rude, they don't want you to feel any worse about yourself. Unfortunately, sometimes you need to make people feel worse before they can make themselves feel better, good intentions can sometimes prevent progress.



causalset said:


> But don't you realize that those two things are one and the same? Political correctness = cult of self acceptance applied to minorities. Disability puts me into a minority, so telling me I should accept my Asperger the way it is and not change it, thats political correctness right htere.


There are links between the two but I wouldn't say that they're the same thing. But sure, I can see where you're coming from.



causalset said:


> No I am talking about the girls that rejected me before relationship started due to them knowing my label.


Well that's a completely different scenario to the one you raised previously. If they aren't understanding enough to actually ask you questions about the label to see what it means in practise then there's nothing you can do about that. Some people prefer to base their opinions on assumptions rather than asking questions, I can understand that, I'm sure it makes life a lot easier as long as those assumptions don't stop you from progressing in life.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> So you just contradicted yourself. In your first quote you said I shouldn't try to change who I am, and in the second quote you said that yes I should.
> 
> Maybe we are talking about different degrees of changing? So what about the following. My voice is naturally fast and loud and I don't put an effort to speak softly and quietly (when I tried to put an effort my mouth got tired after just few minutes of this). I naturally am not good in remembering names and faces, and I am not putting any effort in trying to remember them better. Sometimes I forget to say "hello", "goodbye", "please", "thank you", etc. When I have a train of thought and someone times to interrupt me I would continue to speak over them in order to finish my train of thought; and, on the other hand, when the other person has train of thought and I have some question/comment in the middle I would interrupt and speak over them. I also chew with my mouth open and sometimes when I eat I leave a mess. I talk about myself a lot (as you have noticed). If someone mentions something negative in their life that reminds me of something negative in my life I would more than likely mention the latter.
> 
> So how would you classify those things? As things I should change or things I shouldn't? Those are the sort of things that put people off but then when I tell them I will change they tell me "no don't change you have to be who you are". Do they REALLY mean I have to continue to do the above so that I can be who I am? I mean thats what they are telling me. AND this is the basis on which women reject me. They aren't buying that I will change BECAUSE they don't think I should. Now, back in the 60-s do you really think they would tell me "be who you are?" Nope, they will tell me I should change. Thats why I feel like back in the 60-s I would have been better off when it comes to promising to change since they wouldn't have had "politically correct" ideas to shoot down my promises with.


I didn't contradict myself, I said 'dangerous or self-destructive' and I said 'necessary.' You don't *have* to change yourself for any specific person, but if you want a wider chance at finding people you have to compromise, as LonelyLurker said. I don't *have* to lose weight in order to find a partner because there are people out there who will date larger people; but I have a much better chance of finding someone if I lose weight. Understand?

In your list of things, I would say you don't need to change the last one. And speaking over people when they've interrupted you isn't terrible (if they were polite, they'd let you finish). But if you're going to accept that premise, you should stop interrupting people otherwise you'd be being impolite yourself. Some people aren't good at remembering names and faces, that's not a bad thing if you can politely tell people that you're bad with names and faces.

Forgetting pleasantries is natural but I'd try to make more of an effort, you will come across as less brusque. And chewing with your mouth open/leaving a mess when you eat... yeah, try and change that. With the voice though, I'm not sure. Maybe there's a middle ground you can come to with that. I'd need to hear a sample of your voice to be sure.



> I am not talking about organizations that help people with Asperger. I am talking about the women trying to change me instead of walking away. The women tell me that I shouldn't have to change.


OK, I was a bit too vague (because I was trying to be polite, fwiw). People with Aspergers find it difficult to interact with other people, correct? Organisations that help people with Aspergers may have some ways to help you integrate into society better. At the very least, you might be able to learn what is the Aspergers, what is your personality and what is a culture clash.



> Okay let me give you a better illustration. So, as we all know, conversion therapy is outlawed because it is believed that gays don't want to do it out of their own will but rather they are being pressured to do it by society. But there is one more thing gays are pressured to do: they are pressured into entering heterosexual marriage. So the next logical step would be to make a registry of all the people that are gay and not allow any of the people in that registry to marry opposite gender in order to "protect them" from being "pressured" into doing it. In my case I am straight but the way my Asperger is treated is very similar to that: women refuse to date me in order to prevent me from being "pressured" into changing my table manners.
> 
> I understand you will tell me that my analogy between homosexuality and eating with my mouth open is ridiculous. But I am not the first one who made that analogy. Its all those other people that are telling me "you have to be who you are" each time I say "hey I can learn to eat with my mouth closed" (and yes all those girls that were rebuffing me with "be who you are" sounded EXACTLY the same way as liberals do with regards to gays -- I would have never thought of it if I didn't hear this line over and over). So apparently THEIR politically correct tolerant ideas cover both homosexuality and bad table manners in the same way. The only problem is that they have no interest in letting either of those two groups into heterosexual marriage; their only agenda is to enable them to be happy without the opposite gender partner.


Did they honestly say that about your table manners? If so, I can think of two scenarios:

1. Either you said "What's wrong with me, why are you unhappy, is it my table manners?" and they answered with no, which was possibly true, and the 'Be who you are' part was just a wider concept.

2. They used your table manners as an excuse to walk away without being rude about what they really thought.



> The only problem is that I don't have any sensory issues, yet she didn't believe me. Because you see, not everyone with Asperger have all the symptoms. Thats why I wish she could beleive me when I say I am doing just fine with the noise, but she didn't.
> 
> On the other hand, what DID cause me discomfort is the way I was ostracized by her friends, yet she had no concern about THAT. Her thinking about my sensory issues was a reason for her not to take me out to see her friends. But when I insisted and she did take me out, she didn't make any effort to include me, so I was just sitting there and she was talking to her friends while I felt like a third leg. I later learned from her that her friends were telling her to "stop dating r*tard" and one girl -- whom I never met -- asked her why would she want to "procreate r*tarded children" Perhaps she didn't go about it the right way but she was trying. When I confronted her with the question that, since that girl never saw me, it must have been something she said to her that would make her say it, she didn't even respond other than STOP. She never really apologized for it. She did tell me she stopped talking to that friend (well not really, maybe just sort of calling her less for few weeks) but when I asked her why didn't she stand up for me her answer was STOP.
> 
> Now during the first two months of a relationship she was a lot more respectful than that. All this started when she read up on Asperger. Thats part of why I am saying that autism awarenness is a bad thing.


She read up on Aspergers so she could learn and help you. That's a positive thing. She went about it the wrong way but many people do when they're confronted with something new. What should have happened is a discussion about the symptoms of Aspergers, those that affect you and those that don't. Like I said earlier, an organisation that supports people with Aspergers could help with this. She was trying to be sympathetic. And her friends were horrible people.



> The only problem with this is that -- as I mentioned earlier -- when I want to do something out of my own wishes, people are telling me that no I don't really want it I am being forced to do it. So, speaking of your analogy, suppose someone who is afraid of heights WANTS to go to the tower and learn not to be, but he is being stopped by people telling him "no you don't really want to learn to deal with heights so lets do something else" or "you should be the way you are, so lets do something else", etc. Well that is exactly what people are doing to me socially.


Again, this is showing the need for communication. You need to sit down with people and say "Look, I'd really like to do this but I'm going to need your support. Is there anything you can think of that will help me reach this goal?" Because, to use the analogy, right now people are seeing that you struggle with one flight of stairs, and you're saying "I want to claim the Empire State Building". Baby steps, don't rush things.



> Its not calculating. I mean I am not doing it because I want her to help me with physics. Not at all. Rather I want to improve my self esteem and I find physicist to be prestigious. Now its shallow, yes, but plenty of people are shallow. When people want to marry the sports star or whatever, no one says they don't have concept of love; yet they are saying it in my case.


People who want to marry sports stars don't marry sports stars for love, they do it for money and fame. If they fall in love with a person who happens to be a sports star, then they're not wanting to marry the sports star, they're wanting to marry the person.



> But why not let me reciprocate them later? Better late than never? This by the way is tied together with the rest of what I say about them not letting me change.


Because people don't wait around forever. Especially if it looks like the person they want to be with isn't going to change.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> They're just trying to be supportive, it's just that they're doing it in a cookie cutter way instead of actually trying to understand you and provide tailored support.


Its more complicated than that. I mean remember, in your earlier responses, you said that women are only liking men doing certain things if men actually want to do those things as opposed to women telling them to? Now, this is actually got me into this subject of women telling me that I should be who I am. So one aspect of it is supportive, the other aspect of it isn't; yet they happen to be connected and even intertwined.



LonelyLurker said:


> I'll give you a personal example. When I was younger I was fat, all of my family etc. would try to make me feel better by telling me that I wasn't fat, I knew that they were just trying to make me feel better but it actually did the opposite. It made me feel offended that they thought I was stupid enough not to know they weren't being genuine and let me know that I couldn't trust what they said to me because they were dishonest, it made me feel more alone and isolated.
> 
> However, I can only assume that most people don't react in this way or it wouldn't be so ubiquitous.


That is an interesting observation. On one level, my thoughts are exactly like yours: "do people think I am stupid or what" Yet on the other hand when I was told that my social skills are just fine I didn't feel bad; its when I was told that it is just fine to be ostracized thats when I got mad. I guess my thinking is sort of like this. Social skills is like fashion: having good social skills simply means my behavior should match the "tastes" of whoever watches me. So they are allowed to have a "taste" that likes my behavior, in fact I prefer if they did. But then the next logical question is: if they like me so much why wouldn't they date me (if its a girl) or introduce me to someone I can date (if its a guy) and so forth? And the answer to this is "well you are just fine the way you are, you don't need any other company" and that is when I am like "wait a second I am not fine the way I am; and you won't be fine in my situation either; so what makes you think I am fine? Probably your assumptions that I am not normal; and since you are the one who assumes I am not normal, why are you telling me that I am?" and yes I do wonder whether they think I am stupid or what.

But still now that you brought it up, I can see how I can be offended by being told there is nothing wrong with me even though I weren't offended in the past. I guess the way that the statement that there is nothing wrong with me CAN be a true statement is this: everything is relative so there is nothing wrong with me compared to my low standards. But then the offensive part is that they set such low standards for me, thus implying that I can't handle any other standards. And similarly with weight. No they don't think you are stupid (if anything they might think I am the one whom they assume is stupid since my disorder affects social awarenness but being overweight doesn't make people stupid) but what they "might" think is that you are inherently incapable of having normal weight, thats why "your" normal is different from everyone else's normal, so you indeed weren't fat according to "your" normal weight. And then of course you can get offended why people assume your normal weight is different -- since this basically condemns you for life to be overweight.

By the way how did you finally manage to lose your weight? And what are they telling you now that you finally lost it?



LonelyLurker said:


> Not necessarily, I don't think most people really take the time to look inwards, I think most just follow the examples they see around them and hope for the best.


Wouldn't this make relationships meaningless? If all you are doing is copying other examples, then you aren't really taking your partner as a unique individual.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Its more complicated than that. I mean remember, in your earlier responses, you said that women are only liking men doing certain things if men actually want to do those things as opposed to women telling them to? Now, this is actually got me into this subject of women telling me that I should be who I am. So one aspect of it is supportive, the other aspect of it isn't; yet they happen to be connected and even intertwined.


Internal contradiction is the human condition. If you can accept that the vast majority of people simply aren't logically consistent, you'll find it much easier to understand them.



causalset said:


> That is an interesting observation. On one level, my thoughts are exactly like yours: "do people think I am stupid or what" Yet on the other hand when I was told that my social skills are just fine I didn't feel bad; its when I was told that it is just fine to be ostracized thats when I got mad. I guess my thinking is sort of like this. Social skills is like fashion: having good social skills simply means my behavior should match the "tastes" of whoever watches me. So they are allowed to have a "taste" that likes my behavior, in fact I prefer if they did. But then the next logical question is: if they like me so much why wouldn't they date me (if its a girl) or introduce me to someone I can date (if its a guy) and so forth? And the answer to this is "well you are just fine the way you are, you don't need any other company" and that is when I am like "wait a second I am not fine the way I am; and you won't be fine in my situation either; so what makes you think I am fine? Probably your assumptions that I am not normal; and since you are the one who assumes I am not normal, why are you telling me that I am?" and yes I do wonder whether they think I am stupid or what.
> 
> But still now that you brought it up, I can see how I can be offended by being told there is nothing wrong with me even though I weren't offended in the past. I guess the way that the statement that there is nothing wrong with me CAN be a true statement is this: everything is relative so there is nothing wrong with me compared to my low standards. But then the offensive part is that they set such low standards for me, thus implying that I can't handle any other standards. And similarly with weight. No they don't think you are stupid (if anything they might think I am the one whom they assume is stupid since my disorder affects social awarenness but being overweight doesn't make people stupid) but what they "might" think is that you are inherently incapable of having normal weight, thats why "your" normal is different from everyone else's normal, so you indeed weren't fat according to "your" normal weight. And then of course you can get offended why people assume your normal weight is different -- since this basically condemns you for life to be overweight.
> 
> By the way how did you finally manage to lose your weight? And what are they telling you now that you finally lost it?


Nah, you're over thinking it. They didn't think I was stupid they were just giving me cliched advice/support, they were just saying it because that's what people say, I would guess that that's also what's happening in your case.

People tend to be drawn to absolutes in my experience (there are exceptions of course), nuance doesn't appear to be particularly comforting so generic blanket statements are often the go to when giving advice/support.

I was never the type of fat person that blamed anything external for my weight, I knew full well that I didn't exercise enough (hardly at all) and ate too much (due to a lack of concern for my well being). I eventually decided that I would call my own bluff and see if I could really lose it if I just tried, I could and I did, it wasn't easy but it was fairly simple.

Would you believe that all of the people who were saying that I wasn't fat before could suddenly remember that I was actually fat once I had lost the weight. Strange that isn't it?



causalset said:


> Wouldn't this make relationships meaningless? If all you are doing is copying other examples, then you aren't really taking your partner as a unique individual.


It's up to the individual to decide what is meaningful to them, it wouldn't be meaningful to me but I'm just one man.

I can't dictate another's desires any more than they can dictate mine.

Oh, and I saw you posting in another thread where you asked someone what her interests where when you could have easily just continued talking about yourself, that was good. I didn't want to say anything in that thread as it would appear incredibly condescending but that's the sort of thing you should do more often.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

TheWelshOne said:


> I didn't contradict myself, I said 'dangerous or self-destructive' and I said 'necessary.' You don't *have* to change yourself for any specific person, but if you want a wider chance at finding people you have to compromise, as LonelyLurker said. I don't *have* to lose weight in order to find a partner because there are people out there who will date larger people; but I have a much better chance of finding someone if I lose weight. Understand?


What you said about the "choice" between being the way I am and having less pool of potential dates versus changing the way I am and having wider pool, that makes sense. The only problem is that girls don't allow me to make that choice: they keep making the choice for me and tell me to go with the first option rather than the second. I mean they always rebuff my promises that I will change with saying I should be who I am. If they were to say "I will trust that you change when I see it" that would make a lot more sense and I wouldn't have any complaints against that: I have power to change AND when I change they will reconsider their opinion, sounds great. But the problem is that no one does it except for ONE girl (who, after few months of not seeing it, gave up and joined everyone else). What everyone else is saying is "no no don't change you should be who you are". Don't you see the difference between what you say and what they do? What you say is that I have a choice between giving money and getting grocery versus keeping money and not getting grocery. Sounds reasonable. What they are telling me, on the other hand, is to keep money and not get groceries because its so important for me to keep money. You see what I mean? Any store that wants to ban you can be "polite about it" and say "oh we don't want to inconvenience you in making you spend all that money" and then when I would say "oh no I can afford your food just fine" they would be like "no no, its too hard for you, we can just tell, please don't buy any food" and act as if they are oh so super concerned about ME. You see how stupid this would make me feel?



TheWelshOne said:


> In your list of things, I would say you don't need to change the last one.


Most people would disagree with you. The fact that I am self focused is one of the most commonly cited reason as to why I am disliked.

But in any case, that is something I want to change for me too, not just for them. I mean if all conversations are always about me, I might as well be talking to a brick wall. So I do want to talk about other people. Its just that I "also" want to complain about my life, too, so I want to do both, and in practice it doesn't work that way: once I put other people into the therapist mode they are less likely to act like my peers. So maybe I need to learn to balance more: like maybe alternate between talking about me and them, and that way I would "eventually" bring up whatever I want to bring up about me "without" being self centered. I mean everyone vents about their problems yet they don't appear self centered. So maybe that is why.



TheWelshOne said:


> Did they honestly say that about your table manners?


It wasn't table manners, but it was something on the same level. I am not talking about any specific situation, I am talking about recurrent scenario. In different cases what they pick on is different. But what happens each time is that they pick on something that I didn't find important up until then, but since they decided not to date me because of this I tell them I will change and they say "no you should be who you are". Like I said it wasn't table manners but it "might as well be" because whatever it was, it was similar.



TheWelshOne said:


> If so, I can think of two scenarios:
> 
> 1. Either you said "What's wrong with me, why are you unhappy, is it my table manners?" and they answered with no, which was possibly true, and the 'Be who you are' part was just a wider concept.
> 
> 2. They used your table manners as an excuse to walk away without being rude about what they really thought.


Like I said it wasn't table manners but it was similar. And yeah both 1 and 2 took place. Sometimes they didn't say anything and I inferred that they were upset about whatever I did right before they distanced away, and they were denying it. But then there is another situation where they actually TOLD ME that they were upset about this or that, yet when I started arguing they were like "oh no we didn't mean it" and I was like "oh yes you did, you told me this!" and then they were like "okay yes we meant it, but you shouldn't try to change it you should be who you are" and I am like "if you are worried so much about my comfort why don't you believe me that I will be just find if I change it"



TheWelshOne said:


> She read up on Aspergers so she could learn and help you. That's a positive thing. She went about it the wrong way but many people do when they're confronted with something new. *What should have happened is a discussion about the symptoms of Aspergers,* those that affect you and those that don't. Like I said earlier, an organisation that supports people with Aspergers could help with this. She was trying to be sympathetic. And her friends were horrible people.


At first, it was in fact a discussion. But then, as I was dwelling into little things she lost her patience and was no longer open to discussion. So do you think this is part of why people make so many assumptions about me: that I "discuss" things in such a way that they find tiresome and so they find it far easier to just assume stuff? Do you think if I had better way of "discussing" then I would actually be able to get my message across much better since they would be more open to have discussion with me on the first place?



TheWelshOne said:


> Again, this is showing the need for communication. You need to sit down with people and say "Look, I'd really like to do this but I'm going to need your support. Is there anything you can think of that will help me reach this goal?"


I guess I did INTEND to communicate this. But I guess I never had it as an opening line the way you just suggested. So do you think that the context of other things that I was mentioning such as "what do people think" and so forth was disracting them from seeing the simple thing that I wanted help with what you just quoted?



TheWelshOne said:


> Because, to use the analogy, right now people are seeing that you struggle with one flight of stairs, and you're saying "I want to claim the Empire State Building". Baby steps, don't rush things.


Are you saying that one flight of stairs represents simple conversation while empire state building represents long term relationship? One thing that really got to me is that I had a chat on facebook with one of the girls from the church I been to last year, and while I was talking about something else I casually mentioned one of my ex-s, and she was like "wait, so you had a girlfriend?!" And I asked her why would she assume I never had one. She said because I weren't mentioning her. Then I said that I first came to church in 2015, while the girlfriends I had were in 2003--2004, 2007--2009 and 2012--2014, thats why I had no reason to mention any of them since they were all gone. So why would she assume that I NEVER had a girlfriend in my entire life rather than assuming something more plausible that I didn't have a girlfriend at the moment? And also exactly WHAT she would assume would be a reason for me to NEVER have a girlfriend in my entire life?! She never really answered it (I mean we talked over facebook and so she just changed the subject) but don't you think that her reason of "my never mentioning them" was a fake reason, while the true reason is what you said with regards to "flight of stairs" verses "emire building"? Do you think my poor social skills make people assume things like I never had a girlfriend in my entire life, or worse, that I will die single as well? Oh and incidentally, do you think I SHOULD mention my past three relationships just for the sake of challenging such default assumption everyone seems to make?



TheWelshOne said:


> People who want to marry sports stars don't marry sports stars for love, they do it for money and fame. If they fall in love with a person who happens to be a sports star, then they're not wanting to marry the sports star, they're wanting to marry the person.


And how about a gray area where its combination of both. Yes I want genuine connection AND I want to make myself feel better by being with someone of high status (and I count education as one of the signs of high status). Now I don't normally go around looking for high status: I would gladly date women without status, including women without education. But when I "run into" something like that, then its hard to resist. I mean don't you think there are other people too that, like me, are looking for genuine connection regardless of status, yet find it hard to resist when they ran into sports stars? Well in my case replace sports stars with education and you will see what I mean.



TheWelshOne said:


> Because people don't wait around forever. Especially if it looks like the person they want to be with isn't going to change.


And why would she decide I wasn't going to change when I was telling her over and over that I will. Did she think I have multiple personalities that, despite my clearly stated desire to change, and even obsession about changing, I still won't change?!


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> Internal contradiction is the human condition. If you can accept that the vast majority of people simply aren't logically consistent, you'll find it much easier to understand them.


Its not just the plain lack of consistency, but this is like they have that other rule that they ARE consistent with, but that rule is so unfair. The "consistent" pattern I see across settings is that when someone does soemething wrong, they try to encorage that person to continue along that disractive path. The way police treats sting operations is one clear example of this. You see, part of definition of entrapment is that the suspect "didn't have prior inclination to commit a crime" which implies that if the suspect DOES have an "inclination to commit a crime" its okay to encourage him to commit said crime. So what if the crime involves for example a drug addiction. So here you have a drug addict who truly wants to stop the addiction, but is struggling; and then the cop comes along and says "well he has an inclination towards drug addiction, so let me tempt him a little" and then, not only he ends up going to jail, but also his whole fight against drug addiction flies right out the window. Well this is how it feels like the society treats my Asperger. I tell them i have Asperger. So they take it as me having an "inclination to be antisocial" so then they "entrap" me into acting antisocial by saying things like "you have to be who you are" and then "punish" me for doing what I was entrapped to do by ostracizing me. See the parallel?

As far as "cookie cutter" advice you mentioned, this just confirms what I am saying. Sure, they follow "cookie cutter" ways, but what got those ways started? And what kind of thinking that got them started? A month ago I complained to a certain girl I met online as to why each time I talk about being single people tell me to focus on school or whatever. She told me it is a "cookie cutter" advice that singles in their 30-s get. Then I asked her why that is the advice they get, and here is some of what she said:



> I said especially over 30 because before then, people can assume you'll have a variety of life experiences that may or may not include dating. But after 30 (rough estimate, tends to be higher in cities and lower in rural areas), people assume that singles will pair up and settle down. If you haven't yet, they can make guesses as to why (too focused on job/career/schooling, too picky, not good at relationships, etc.), but most are too rude to say to someone's face. So they skirt around the issue, and don't realize that saying something less rude is still rude.


And then I was like wait a second, if they expect me to pair up, why aren't they pushing me to hurry up and do it? Why are they telling me to focus on something else instead? See, thats where my entrapment analogy comes in. Since I have an "inclination" towards a "crime" of "not pairing up", they decided to "entrap" me into "not pairing up" by telling me "why don't you focus on school instead". And I find it totally unfair and hurtful.



LonelyLurker said:


> Oh, and I saw you posting in another thread where you asked someone what her interests where when you could have easily just continued talking about yourself, that was good. I didn't want to say anything in that thread as it would appear incredibly condescending but that's the sort of thing you should do more often.


Thats only because she mentioned things I could relate to, whereas in cases of most other people I can't relate to things they talk about since my life experience is so limitted. Which goes to show: maybe my problem is not being self centered but rather lack of life experience, so maybe people should take me out and expose me to more stuff and then I won't be so self centered any more.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Its not just the plain lack of consistency, but this is like they have that other rule that they ARE consistent with, but that rule is so unfair. The "consistent" pattern I see across settings is that when someone does soemething wrong, they try to encorage that person to continue along that disractive path. The way police treats sting operations is one clear example of this. You see, part of definition of entrapment is that the suspect "didn't have prior inclination to commit a crime" which implies that if the suspect DOES have an "inclination to commit a crime" its okay to encourage him to commit said crime. So what if the crime involves for example a drug addiction. So here you have a drug addict who truly wants to stop the addiction, but is struggling; and then the cop comes along and says "well he has an inclination towards drug addiction, so let me tempt him a little" and then, not only he ends up going to jail, but also his whole fight against drug addiction flies right out the window. Well this is how it feels like the society treats my Asperger. I tell them i have Asperger. So they take it as me having an "inclination to be antisocial" so then they "entrap" me into acting antisocial by saying things like "you have to be who you are" and then "punish" me for doing what I was entrapped to do by ostracizing me. See the parallel?


Yes, I can see the parallel. Let me tell you something...

I often wonder if there is a chair at the relationship table for me, if the very idea of there being a chair for me is laughable. I've jokingly said that "I don't ask for much, all I want is a non-human human", this is obviously an oxymoron but it is the core of my issues, I don't have high standards but I do have different standards. I may not have Asperger's but this is *my* cross to bear, at least you can see the destination you'd like to reach, you just need to find a way to navigate there. Part of that navigation will include being able to deal with the hypocrisy you will sometimes encounter, maybe you could think of it as a condition that they have and need your help with. Just as you need them to explicitly tell you things so that you can act accordingly, they need you to be independently aware of certain things so that they can feel valued. Just as it's not your fault that you have Asperger's, it's not their fault that they're normal, it took me a while to realise that, but it's true.

So learn from your mistakes, learn as much as you can and if she won't allow you to show what you've learnt, accept it and move on to the next one, you'll be better than you were before. Do that enough and you'll have an increased chance of success as you won't need them to tell you things you've already learned previously.



causalset said:


> As far as "cookie cutter" advice you mentioned, this just confirms what I am saying. Sure, they follow "cookie cutter" ways, but what got those ways started? And what kind of thinking that got them started? A month ago I complained to a certain girl I met online as to why each time I talk about being single people tell me to focus on school or whatever. She told me it is a "cookie cutter" advice that singles in their 30-s get. Then I asked her why that is the advice they get, and here is some of what she said:...
> 
> ...And then I was like wait a second, if they expect me to pair up, why aren't they pushing me to hurry up and do it? Why are they telling me to focus on something else instead? See, thats where my entrapment analogy comes in. Since I have an "inclination" towards a "crime" of "not pairing up", they decided to "entrap" me into "not pairing up" by telling me "why don't you focus on school instead". And I find it totally unfair and hurtful.


Her response was actually pretty good, she sounds like she's at least actually thought about it. She was still trying to spare your feelings but it sounds like you need things to be made a little less ambiguous. The reason people tell you to focus on other things is likely because they either can't think of anything that they think would help you to succeed so fall back to cliches, think you are presently a hopeless cause or that if you are able to become successful that will compensate for what they perceive as your personality deficiencies. Obviously this isn't absolute but those would be the main reasons.



causalset said:


> Thats only because she mentioned things I could relate to, whereas in cases of most other people I can't relate to things they talk about since my life experience is so limitted. Which goes to show: maybe my problem is not being self centered but rather lack of life experience, so maybe people should take me out and expose me to more stuff and then I won't be so self centered any more.


What you could try to do is find parallels between their interests and yours at a deeper level, why do they like what they like? Does anything make you feel that way? Is there anything that makes them feel the way you feel about your interests? Would they be willing to share their interests with you (so that you can do it together) to see if you would feel the same way too? That sort of thing, an indirect connection is still a connection and if properly nurtured can become a direct connection.

For example if I met someone and they told me that they loved art museums, I *could* just say "I'm not much of an art fan" and leave it at that, but it would be much better for me to say "Art's never really resonated with me but I wish it did, maybe you could take me to a gallery sometime and show me what I'm missing". It shows that you're not stuck in your ways and willing to make an effort for her.

It shows the ability to compromise.


----------



## TheWelshOne (Sep 29, 2013)

causalset said:


> What you said about the "choice" between being the way I am and having less pool of potential dates versus changing the way I am and having wider pool, that makes sense. The only problem is that girls don't allow me to make that choice: they keep making the choice for me and tell me to go with the first option rather than the second.


OK, to use my own example (since I can understand it better):

My sister tells me I don't need to lose weight in order to find someone. Logically this is true since I see people who are larger than me with partners. However, my good friends tell me that losing weight is the best way to raise my chances of finding a partner. But it's still my choice ultimately.

My friends are not telling me to lose weight so that *they* will find me more attractive, they have nothing to gain by me losing weight. Likewise, my sister is not being cruel by telling me not to lose weight in order to be attractive. They both have their reasons for telling me their opinions and they are both right in different ways.

If I met someone and we started dating, it would be a great burden on them to say "Look, I don't like x, y and z about you, change it or I leave." Rational people don't do that. Rational people say "Look, x, y and z aren't attractive qualities to me, you should find someone who finds x, y and z attractive."



> Most people would disagree with you. The fact that I am self focused is one of the most commonly cited reason as to why I am disliked.


Actually, the last example was "If someone mentions something negative in their life that reminds me of something negative in my life I would more than likely mention the latter." That's natural; I do that too (and I obsess over whether it's a bad thing to do it). If someone is talking about something, you show empathy by sharing an example from your own life. Someone's pet just died? You tell them how you felt when *your* pet died.



> It wasn't table manners, but it was something on the same level. I am not talking about any specific situation, I am talking about recurrent scenario.


A lot of this is very vague now. What you assume is the same level as table manners may not be on the same level. Like you said, *you* didn't find it important until they mentioned it. But you also didn't see the significance of remembering the ring style of your girlfriend, so maybe it's more important to them than it is to you. And if it's important to them, we end up back at the start of this - changing specific traits for someone (when those traits are not dangerous or self-destructive) puts a burden on that person that most people are not willing to deal with.

You've said yourself that if a woman wanted sex before marriage, you would dump her. You wouldn't ask her to wait until you got married, because you're aware that a lot of people don't understand the significance of waiting. This is the same as that.



> At first, it was in fact a discussion. But then, as I was dwelling into little things she lost her patience and was no longer open to discussion. So do you think this is part of why people make so many assumptions about me: that I "discuss" things in such a way that they find tiresome and so they find it far easier to just assume stuff? Do you think if I had better way of "discussing" then I would actually be able to get my message across much better since they would be more open to have discussion with me on the first place?


Short answer? Yes.

Long answer: Your posts on here prove that you have quite a tiresome way of discussing things. Very few people are patient enough to read your entire posts, as you've discovered. This in itself is a personality trait that can be off-putting. Coupled with the fact that you dwell on things far longer than you should, yes, I can imagine that being your friend/girlfriend is quite a chore.

I can see that you like to find order and reason in everything. You need there to be logic to everyone's behaviour. But that doesn't happen. People are not logical and rational all the time. If they were, most of us would not have social anxiety.

I wish I could figure out a way to help you change (in a minimal way). Your posts are long and overly complicated, with tangents and assumptions that are unnecessary. My best friend has a similar style of writing but she at least makes it all relevant to the discussion.

If I had to make a recommendation (note: I'm just a person, no qualifications, I have no idea what I'm actually saying) I'd say you need to work on your patience and your communication. Try to get to the crux of things as soon as possible, try not to get frustrated if people don't understand you, just try to find a different way of explaining things until you find one that works.



> Are you saying that one flight of stairs represents simple conversation while empire state building represents long term relationship? One thing that really got to me is that I had a chat on facebook with one of the girls from the church I been to last year, and while I was talking about something else I casually mentioned one of my ex-s, and she was like "wait, so you had a girlfriend?!" And I asked her why would she assume I never had one. She said because I weren't mentioning her.


Well, there are a few things at play here.

1. You appear to have interpreted the girl at church's "wait, so you had a girlfriend?!" as surprise and incredulity. That's how your brain heard it, that may not be how she meant it. It would also depend on how you mentioned her, and from the fact that she was surprised you hadn't mentioned her, perhaps she misunderstood and thought you *currently* had a girlfriend (it would be natural to be surprised if she had known you for a while and hadn't heard you talk about a current girlfriend).

2. People can make assumptions and those assumptions can be based on stereotypes. If you come across as a very antisocial person who doesn't mix well with others, or if you're overly focused on your work, it would be natural to assume that relationships are not something that you've had.

And yes, the flight of stairs is basic social interactions, the Empire State Building is longer term interactions (not necessarily relationships, but friendships etc). If we assume that the top of the Empire State Building is the pinnacle of social interaction, all of us on this forum are attempting to get to it. Some of us are halfway to the top or closer, some of us are standing on the street outside. People without social anxiety don't tend to understand why everyone isn't at the top of the Empire State Building, because they didn't have any trouble getting there. So when they see us struggling with certain things, they assign a level to us.

There are certain people on here who I cannot believe have never had relationships, because they seem so 'normal' (for lack of a better word). There are also people here who I can't believe have jobs, because they seem so anxious. There are people I can't believe have social anxiety at all. It affects us all in different ways. I never had a shot at getting a PhD (I didn't even finish high school), and I've never had any chance at a relationship. Comparing the two of us, you are closer to the top of the Empire State Building, because you have had more 'normality'. But I'm sure you would interpret the information you have about the two of us differently.



> And how about a gray area where its combination of both. Yes I want genuine connection AND I want to make myself feel better by being with someone of high status (and I count education as one of the signs of high status).


Let's change 'sports star' to 'actor' and use George Clooney as an example here.

1. George Clooney is a famous actor. Very high status.
2. George Clooney is conventionally handsome.
3. George Clooney is charismatic, friendly, has a good sense of humour.

The above three statements are true. Numbers 2 and 3 are true of many people who are not George Clooney and those are attractive qualities that people are drawn to. There is also a distinct correlation between numbers 2 and 3, and number 1. If he were less attractive, or less charismatic, he would likely be less famous and thus less high status. When people say they want to date George Clooney, they're not talking about his status, they're talking about the personality traits that allowed him to rise to that status.

Likewise, when most people say "I want a partner who's educated", they're finding an easy way to say "I want a partner who's intelligent and ambitious". They're making a correlation between education and personality traits that they find attractive. Not all intelligent people are educated (I'm not particularly unintelligent and I'm not highly educated) but it's a fair assumption that educated people are intelligent. Does that make sense?

Consider the difference between a sports star and the sister of a senator. A sports star has worked hard to get where they are, impressed the right people. The sister of a senator has done none of that; like royalty, they got there without any effort. Shallowness is when you find effortless status attractive.



> And why would she decide I wasn't going to change when I was telling her over and over that I will. Did she think I have multiple personalities that, despite my clearly stated desire to change, and even obsession about changing, I still won't change?!


You said it was only after she gave up pursuing you that you started to offer to change. If you were trying to have a conversation with someone for months, and finally got exasperated and gave up, but then they started trying to talk to you, how would *you* feel?


----------

