• 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

The Truth About Men Who Live Alone Without a Girlfriend.

@vergil96

As I posted earlier, what you said is true: unreasonable expectations are possible, and not all that uncommon.

But you're still presenting this as an example of XY misbehavior rather than an issue between two adults

If it's the result of a negotiation (as implied by your "decision making process on the individual level" ) the result can't be unreasonable. Similarly, there's no "immaturity" if the negotiation results in one person or the other performing certain activities because they're better at them.

For example you'd expect the most efficient cook to do most of the weekday cooking. OTOH washing clothes and dishes (using modern equipment) are examples of activities that are easily learned (low experience advantage), so they can be split, or used to e.g. balance out something for which one partner is better/faster.

Considering all household-related activities, there's also yard work,, cars, repairs, flatpack assembly - most of which, like cooking, are more efficient if done by someone with experience.

Might there be, on aggregate, an XY or XX gender bias for some activities?
Probably - I'd be surprised if some didn't turn up in the statistics .

But would it matter? Not if the division is fair.
 
I am not, by nature and upbringing, focused upon equity and equality issues in my life, but with some nuance here, there should be some degree of fairness and reciprocity between life partners. If there is a significant imbalance, the outcomes are not good.

My wife and I are medical professionals, both working long hours, several days a week. Not uncommon for one, the other, or both to put in 50+ hours. Having said that, it is easier to do this since the kids left the house, but when the kids were young, there was a lot more responsibilities. As such, both of us had shared duties, laundry, cleaning, meals, childrearing, etc. However, even then, there was a bias in the division in labor where I took care of the yard, the vehicles, the home mechanicals and she took care of the meals, laundry, childrearing, and the day-to-day management of the family and home. Obviously, if she was gone all day and I was at home, I had to pick up those duties, and vice-versa.

Every home will eventually settle into some division of labor based upon skill sets, interests, and talents, even time. It's easy to oversimplify and simply call them "gender roles" when the reality is that my wife and I do things differently, have different aptitudes, interests, different time schedules, and as long as there is some balance in the division of responsibilities, it all works out. Two different people can often compliment each other, work as a team, for the betterment of both.

Where I think some couples run into trouble is when there is an imbalance, whether it be due to incompatibility, a lack of responsibility, a lack of self-discipline, a power imbalance, or enabling behaviors. With anger, frustration, and impatience, one partner will say to themselves, "Fine, I'll do it myself". The other partner wins that battle, erroneously thinking they are the genius for getting out of doing something, but what they fail to appreciate or realize is that for every battle they win, they are losing the war. They will be increasingly seen as unreliable "dead weight" as they "check out" of the relationship. The other person takes on more and more and more, becomes angry and resentful, and at some point it comes to a head, a final straw that breaks the camel's back, and the relationship ends in dramatic fashion.
 
Last edited:
I translate "The Truth About. . . " as "A selection of ideas that seem to fit well together." Rational thought is rare. Rationalization is everywhere, as a veneer over emotional decisions made in the pre-verbal brain.
 
Two different people can often compliment each other, work as a team, for the betterment of both.
It's good if it works, but some ppl are not suited to being in a couple relationship, and are more content with their solitude, preferring friendships/companionship instead.

I think it's rather unfortunate that autistic ppl in particular are bombarded with the social indoctrination that to be content, they must find a significant other partner.

Of course, there are hormonal considerations, especially for younger ppl, which compound the sense of loneliness.
We are manipulated by our instinctual, erm, instincts, after all.

These sorts of insights usually come via hard-won personal experiences.
Studies support this "stepping stone" principle.

The Wise Old Fart has spoken. :cool:
 
But you're still presenting this as an example of XY misbehavior rather than an issue between two adults
I'm not. I didn't mention that men specifically misbehave. I mentioned a girlfriend, because the thread is from the heterosexual man's perspective. It could be a woman who has a girlfriend. I didn't say men are doing anything wrong by and large, I can't even find a quote that could be read this way. I criticised the behaviour of *expecting in advance* that the partner will do the housekeeping, while still not having a partner. My whole point is that it's an issue between two adults and it's important to be a realist. People are single, later they might get divorced, become widowed and so on.

If it's the result of a negotiation (as implied by your "decision making process on the individual level" ) the result can't be unreasonable. Similarly, there's no "immaturity" if the negotiation results in one person or the other performing certain activities because they're better at them.
No, I was referring to expecting - assuming that someone will do something without consulting it with this person.

Definition of EXPECT

"bound in duty, obligated"
"neccesary"

Edit: I waited with the response, because I wanted to take a closer look if I didn't say something that could be easily misinterpreted, I wanted to make sure what actually happened instead of jumping to conclusions or arguing that I didn't say something that I did in fact say.
 
Last edited:

New Threads

Top Bottom