I’ve actually been hoping to meet a shy woman for many years now. I tend to be more attracted to the glasses wearing and artsy types than the hot types. The latter tend to already have boyfriends and usually only want “hunks”, which I am not.
-
Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
- Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral
Dating: How can I get a girlfriend?
- Thread starter Markness
- Start date
- Status
You may have seen them, but not noticed. I had met some at work, at cooking lessons that I like to participate in. On outings. But, as with meeting any woman, you must approach to sell yourself and get her interest.
Because of that dynamic I believe shy women, who may want to meet quirky, more sensitive, guys, probably are approached by guys not their type. Naive and inexperienced shy women, hoping for a relationship, are seduced by the possibility of meeting somebody their type, and end up feeling used by the guys who just drop them (and after all the time those shy women have had a lot of anxiety). Never be that type of guy.
I hope you will meet a nice shy woman, and hope you will up your game, socially, economically, personally, to bring your own value to the relationship.
Are you far more likely to get a date being masculine, social, confident, assertive acting and/or attractive? Probably. But there is still a good chance of getting a date if you can show more the good traits about you, whether showing any insights/intelligence, rationality, niceness, listening ability, support for others, interests, any politeness skills, any independent living skills, open- mindedness, work ethic, honesty--if done in a fair and caring way--responsibility, humor, patience, mysterious ways, etc.
The point is, yes, more women may be searching for things you feel you are incapable of in your mind, but there are still many women who learn over time that there are other traits more endearing. But, if they cannot see you focusing on, talking about or showing any of those sides more, showing instead more things that be seen as more negative, cynical, or cyclic, regardless of any rights you have there, and any ways there, judgements can be made, with some others perhaps thinking, "Why date this guy; he seems not long-term material." Unfortunately, it is what it is; from what I see, women on average still tend to have more needs from a guy, than guys have needs for women.
A point, but an oversimplification. We need different things. As we accommodate to each other, the negotiating over each other's needs continues between my spouse and I
I’ve been struggling with clinical depression since 2006. That’s almost 16 years now. I’ve even had TMS done on me because it got really bad in 2020.
One of the people who hates me here said I needed to hit “rock bottom” before I could even start to get better.
What do you like to do? What interests you? What are you interested in learning? Find ways to get involved in your community that is fulfilling to you. Maybe its a bookclub, writing group, open mic poetry, an art class, a recreational sports team, social dancing, worship at your library, jam session, fun run, volunteering, church, etc...... Get out and live. Say hello, ask people how they are, make small talk. Practice being friendly without the intent of a date, just to build connections with people. Consistency is helpful in building connections. So try to commit to going to the same event regularly so people get to know you.
Define your values and interests and be true to who you are. Don't Try to shape yourself into what you think someone else wants. Don't try to force romance with someone. Be authentic to yourself while remaining open to the possibility of connection. Let things unfold naturally by putting yourself out there and being open. Approach social interaction with curiosity not expectation.
There are different levels of interaction. the most superficial being a smile or exchange of acknowledgment with a stranger. then people you are acquainted with but don't know well. Then friendships of shared interests, values and opinions. to the deeper level of someone you share vulnerable emotions, thoughts and insecurities. There is value in having positive interactions, on all levels. Most people we encounter will remain superficial, but some will develop into deeper connections. In those initial interactions we never know who will become closer friends.
How do you progress from a superficial interaction to deeper levels? This requires repeated interactions to get to know each other. A good way to do this is simply frequent the same location/event regularly and see who else is usually there. Start saying hello and learn the names of the regulars. Using people's names is a powerful way of showing you see them and value them. In conversations, ask questions and find common ground. Remember details they share and bring it up in later conversations. Try to match their level of engagement. If someone is giving short responses while turned away and looking around the room, they are disengaging so you should back off. If someone is looking at you and giving thoughtful response, they are open to more lengthy conversation.
And keep working on your self growth. Whatever personal goals you have.
There is only one way to learn how to have healthy relationships, and that is through practice and experience. You have to get out there. And when it doesn't work out, use that as an opportunity to learn and grow.
Define your values and interests and be true to who you are. Don't Try to shape yourself into what you think someone else wants. Don't try to force romance with someone. Be authentic to yourself while remaining open to the possibility of connection. Let things unfold naturally by putting yourself out there and being open. Approach social interaction with curiosity not expectation.
There are different levels of interaction. the most superficial being a smile or exchange of acknowledgment with a stranger. then people you are acquainted with but don't know well. Then friendships of shared interests, values and opinions. to the deeper level of someone you share vulnerable emotions, thoughts and insecurities. There is value in having positive interactions, on all levels. Most people we encounter will remain superficial, but some will develop into deeper connections. In those initial interactions we never know who will become closer friends.
How do you progress from a superficial interaction to deeper levels? This requires repeated interactions to get to know each other. A good way to do this is simply frequent the same location/event regularly and see who else is usually there. Start saying hello and learn the names of the regulars. Using people's names is a powerful way of showing you see them and value them. In conversations, ask questions and find common ground. Remember details they share and bring it up in later conversations. Try to match their level of engagement. If someone is giving short responses while turned away and looking around the room, they are disengaging so you should back off. If someone is looking at you and giving thoughtful response, they are open to more lengthy conversation.
And keep working on your self growth. Whatever personal goals you have.
There is only one way to learn how to have healthy relationships, and that is through practice and experience. You have to get out there. And when it doesn't work out, use that as an opportunity to learn and grow.
Great suggestions @Maggiepie . Who of us that have succeeded with long term relationships did not learn to advocate for ourselves in such ways? When I met my future spouse I was coming off of a failed relationship and just concentrating on improving myself. It was the first time I contacted a woman I otherwise did not know and this was supposed to be a simple transaction of car pooling to a Sierra Club, national, outing. As one thing led to another, we kept in touch, planning the road trip to fill a few days before we met the group. It was an intensity of experience unlike anything I have had before with a woman. And, at that time in my life I was still very inexperienced with women. Imagine compressing all that inexperience into four intense days, and things were so positive that I was falling for her and sensed that this was mutual. A (reluctant) virgin at 28, and even though I was filled with anxiety, we made love. I had never felt so accepted in my life. And, all of that because I learned how to interact socially in the ways you mention, @Maggiepie and was determined to like myself and other people.
Maybe "Humpty-Dumpty" first became the girl's friend. Where she focused more on who he is rather than what he looks like. Regardless of his "situation". And that what she discovered attracted her to him enough to become his girlfriend.
It's not that complicated. And it works. I know, as I don't date but I do make friends. Friends in some cases who later became lovers. I've posted this a number of times and yet it still doesn't seem to sink in.
It may be the only card you have to play in the game of romance. Use it instead of contemplating conventional strategies that clearly don't work for you.
Last edited:
I’ve been trying to make platonic friendships with women. I just don’t seem successful at it. One thing that tends to stop me is that there are women whose boyfriends won’t let them socialize with other men.
@Markness has really changed a lot. Very much more open to ideas and less negative thinking. Really trying to open up and take more chances.
Even myself, l noticed how l look at things is very important no matter what the circumstance is. I actually have struggled dearly the last two years, but l try to keep a positive outlook which keeps me hopeful for a change.
Frankly I made a point not to get too friendly towards women with a significant other.
Reminds me of a nice girl I used to work with whose boyfriend was well, seriously insanely jealous. He didn't like any guy talking to her unless it was strictly business. I still remember when he got into scuffle with another employee and had to be physically removed from the premises.
Yeah, they can be a problem. That much is true.
Last edited:
True, dat. I cannot help but think that creating a friendship first with my future spouse broke down my anxiety and led to the relationship that is still going strong.
Exactly what I've always tried to get at in the power of making a friend first. A scenario which allowed me socially to keep it all together. Making all the difference in the world instead of appearing inept or awkward.
Yet it also allows one to let others see themselves rather than a facade based on dating rituals. When you really don't even need that "wingman".
Last edited:
Ms Muffinz
Member
I am skeptical of dating in the first place.
At least in western culture, dating (people having an intimate romantic relationship outside of marriage, often including sex) has only been around for roughly a hundred years.
Before this, people got married and committed to their partners first, then had sex and intimacy.
Many modern people have difficulties finding a romantic partner, or of maintaining a relationship. They get hurt and oftentimes suffer emotionally.
I see this as quite obvious — because dating is new, and the human body is not engineered to handle multiple romantic relationships in one life time, much less multiple sexual partners.
I am not saying that dating is morally evil or wrong. I am saying that the body is not built for it, so of course it will cause suffering.
So @Markness, I think what is happening to you is completely normal. Dating is hard because it is new and unnatural.
At least in western culture, dating (people having an intimate romantic relationship outside of marriage, often including sex) has only been around for roughly a hundred years.
Before this, people got married and committed to their partners first, then had sex and intimacy.
Many modern people have difficulties finding a romantic partner, or of maintaining a relationship. They get hurt and oftentimes suffer emotionally.
I see this as quite obvious — because dating is new, and the human body is not engineered to handle multiple romantic relationships in one life time, much less multiple sexual partners.
I am not saying that dating is morally evil or wrong. I am saying that the body is not built for it, so of course it will cause suffering.
So @Markness, I think what is happening to you is completely normal. Dating is hard because it is new and unnatural.
I have great interest in physiology and human evolution. You make some bold statements about human physiology. Please provide the citations. It has been recognized for some time that culture appears to hold greater adaptive potential than genetic inheritance and is probably driving human evolution. [Long-term gene-culture coevolution and the human evolutionary transition - PubMed]
Dating and sex during dating, being cultural, can be free of what you state as physiological constraints. It has been postulated that biological traits are simultaneously altered by genetic evolution in response to cultural innovation.
Dating is hard because it involves emotional work in the negotiation between two people who are setting themselves up to be vulnerable to each other.
Ms Muffinz
Member
Incoming long reply: I’ve written this at the bottom, but will put this here as well, as I’m aware I will come off defensive and attempting attack.
I am grinning as I write this reply.
I skimmed the article — I notice that the paper does not specify the time frame that culture changes humans. Perhaps the article is talking about something different from what I am taking about. I don’t know.
What I could find, I’ve attached.
It says that it can happen between seconds and decades. This is vague to me.
So are we saying that somebody can learn a new piece of information and change in two seconds (which to me sounds magical, but perhaps is true and I simply don’t know? Or it is referring to a chemical process that I cannot feel? I’m not judging the accuracy of the article - I’m pointing out that it’s not made explicit, so I can’t see it).
Or are we talking about how a generation can change their habits around consumption (which sounds more reasonable)?
Or am I completely off base here? I am literally reading the words.
Perhaps there are technical terms that mean something different from colloquial usage? (happens often in philosophy).
And maybe this is beyond the scope of the article, but it doesn’t say which aspects of humanity the culture affects as well.
Is it taking about mating? Learning? Food? Or is it referring to every single aspect of human culture — which would require much more investigation than one paper.
Perhaps I’m missing something, or something is assumed knowledge in the field and they don’t make it explicit. (For example in a math paper they won’t explain the algebra happening between two lines — it is assumed the reader knows).
And again, to make it clear, I am not claiming the article is wrong.
It is simply that I know from experience that technical terms often don’t mean what laymen think, and there are often implicit assumptions made to what the reader already knows. So me literally reading the article and thinking can only go so far. And what I thought, I have written above.
My information on the history of dating comes from Wikipedia.
Dating - Wikipedia
My assertions on physiology come from axiomatic logical reasoning (which means lack of concrete textbook knowledge on physiology).
Axiom 1: Assume the history of dating according to the Wikipedia is correct, and that dating started a couple centuries ago.
Axiom 2 (which may be wrong): The longer humans have been repeating a behavior, the “deeper” the brain region required for the action is in the brain, and thus the “harder” it is to change. For example, humans have been mating for longer than they were humans. They learned to read and write relatively recently compared to that. So the urge to mate will be stronger, and harder to alter, than the urge (if there even is one) to read or write. And it will be harder to manage the emotions and drives around mating compared to that of reading and writing, since it is older and stronger.
Reasoning from there: Dating has been done for 200 years. Mating (and possibly pair bonding) has been done for the entire history of mankind. Therefore, the drives around mating (and possible pair bonding) are stronger and harder to alter.
I hope you understand what I am trying to say. I don’t know if this will help, but I am grinning as I write this.
Science , while supported by some constrained forms of logic, is an empirical science. Your assumptions about physiology, which you do not state, means that you lack actual concrete material examples for your conclusions. Logic and aristotelian reasoning does not substitute for observable fact.Incoming long reply: I’ve written this at the bottom, but will put this here as well, as I’m aware I will come off defensive and attempting attack.
I am grinning as I write this reply.
I skimmed the article — I notice that the paper does not specify the time frame that culture changes humans. Perhaps the article is talking about something different from what I am taking about. I don’t know.
What I could find, I’ve attached.
View attachment 89711
It says that it can happen between seconds and decades. This is vague to me.
So are we saying that somebody can learn a new piece of information and change in two seconds (which to me sounds magical, but perhaps is true and I simply don’t know? Or it is referring to a chemical process that I cannot feel? I’m not judging the accuracy of the article - I’m pointing out that it’s not made explicit, so I can’t see it).
Or are we talking about how a generation can change their habits around consumption (which sounds more reasonable)?
Or am I completely off base here? I am literally reading the words.
Perhaps there are technical terms that mean something different from colloquial usage? (happens often in philosophy).
And maybe this is beyond the scope of the article, but it doesn’t say which aspects of humanity the culture affects as well.
Is it taking about mating? Learning? Food? Or is it referring to every single aspect of human culture — which would require much more investigation than one paper.
Perhaps I’m missing something, or something is assumed knowledge in the field and they don’t make it explicit. (For example in a math paper they won’t explain the algebra happening between two lines — it is assumed the reader knows).
And again, to make it clear, I am not claiming the article is wrong.
It is simply that I know from experience that technical terms often don’t mean what laymen think, and there are often implicit assumptions made to what the reader already knows. So me literally reading the article and thinking can only go so far. And what I thought, I have written above.
My information on the history of dating comes from Wikipedia.
Dating - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
My assertions on physiology come from axiomatic logical reasoning (which means lack of concrete textbook knowledge on physiology).
Axiom 1: Assume the history of dating according to the Wikipedia is correct, and that dating started a couple centuries ago.
Axiom 2 (which may be wrong): The longer humans have been repeating a behavior, the “deeper” the brain region required for the action is in the brain, and thus the “harder” it is to change. For example, humans have been mating for longer than they were humans. They learned to read and write relatively recently compared to that. So the urge to mate will be stronger, and harder to alter, than the urge (if there even is one) to read or write. And it will be harder to manage the emotions and drives around mating compared to that of reading and writing, since it is older and stronger.
Reasoning from there: Dating has been done for 200 years. Mating (and possibly pair bonding) has been done for the entire history of mankind. Therefore, the drives around mating (and possible pair bonding) are stronger and harder to alter.
I hope you understand what I am trying to say. I don’t know if this will help, but I am grinning as I write this.
Statements in your (non) Axiom 2 are woefully ignorant of neurophysiology and neuropsych. You seem to conflate the brainstem, limbic system and neocortex and do not recognize the operation of the modular brain, especially within the discussion of emergent properties (The great split between Wallace and Darwin). I suggest you study Steven Pinker's How the Mind Works. Your ideas about behavior fixation and strength I hope you know are in error, especially within a modular brain/mind.
Your reasoning in light of any lack of training in the Biological Sciences is much like what is known as a Gish Gallop . . . . an argument so filled with falsehood that one is puzzled where to start with refutation.
I am sorry to be so blunt as I try to be circumspect, but I dislike people who ignore the Biological Sciences yet feel free to pontificate without evidence. Provide the factual basis for your statements
[Added] Sex and bonding is a basic human need, that I agree with. There are milestones within the timeframe of human psychosocial development that are necessary for balanced mental health. For me, for many Autistic suffering social delays, this creates profound problems with self image and body image. My social dysfunction has resulted in PTSD from social and sexual isolation. I now struggle against misogynistic thoughts which are alien to my being in the world.
Last edited:
I think it is a bit concerning that there are women who have males control who they can and can’t socialize with….
Yes, it is concerning, it's a hallmark of an abusive/controlling relationship, possibly with a narcissist.
- Status
New Threads
-
-
-
-
Some phones have such bad quality when you call them
- Started by Misty Avich
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
-
So I finally heard back from the psychologist about an assessment
- Started by DNC24
- Replies: 10
-