Are Autistic Men More Likely to be Misogynistic?
I can relate to your frustration, having suffered many experiences like those in the past, but I don't consider it fair to call women "superficial" just because they have certain preferences for a romantic partner. Presumably we're not talking about an ordinary friendship here, in which case it wouldn't matter what you look like. We're talking about a relationship with a sexual element thrown into the mix, and the fact of the matter is that both men and women would rather have sex with whomever they find physically attractive. If you're like me and most other guys, you doubtless feel the same, so you can't fairly take women to task for valuing attractiveness the way we all do.
Honestly your whole attitude appears symptomatic of a larger trend in today's society to resent attractive people for having their own standards that we don't live up to, calling them "shallow" even though it's their appearance that draws us towards them in the first place. And as the average American waistline continues to balloon thanks to the abundance of cheap hi-calorie food and modern convenience, unfortunately a larger proportion of us just happen to be sinking towards the bottom of the sexual desirability barrel due to our less healthy physiques. Certainly the whole "fat acceptance" movement is spearheaded by overweight women who feel inconvenienced by conventional beauty standards, just as you have a lot of overweight men with scruffy necks endorsing MRA- or PUA-style misogyny. That's why I've come to believe the inter-gender warfare you see all over the Internet is driven more than anything else by the swelling tide of sexual frustration in wake of our obesity epidemic.
androbot01
Veteran
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
This is the kind of faulty thinking that leads to misogyny. There are no standards that if met will result in a girlfriend. Relationships form organically out of life.
........
Sly, stay off internet dating sites. Spend some time out in the real world. Personally, I think you're a sweetie, but the pot won't boil if you don't stop staring at it. Relationships are things that happen naturally as a result of living life.
idealy and in the past yes. but todays world no. people have super high standards, perhaps from all they everyone is #1 you're entitled to success. you can do anything. you're super amazing. nonsense they've been told growing up. meeting the requirements won't guarantee you a gf, but not meeting them will guarantee you won't get one. you have to meet thier requirements to be allowed to talk to them and that is where the organic bonding happens.
You are assuming that all women's "standards" are the same.
My two cents:
I think a deficit of social interaction with real people makes Aspie men more likely to be susceptible to toxic views on women but also a a warped perspective of reality in general. Most of the time guys on here try to explain and justify their warped views they cite movie and tv clips as if that is how things work in real life. They live in a perpetual cognitive feedback loop that they can't change because they refuse to recognize it.
It's why relationship advice from people who constantly fail at dating (thus confirming their preconcieved notions) is more valuable in their eyes than people who can have successful relationships (whom they generally ignore and dismiss, at least on this forum) Acknowledging that socially awkward guys can and do have successful relationships all the time and that most women aren't actually out to get them goes against the cognitive feedback loop that the rely on to justify their backwards sexist ideas.
The thing is, I'm pretty sure most of these guys aren't Misogynists...... they just don't know any better.
It's why relationship advice from people who constantly fail at dating (thus confirming their preconcieved notions) is more valuable in their eyes than people who can have successful relationships (whom they generally ignore and dismiss, at least on this forum)
There's a damn good reason for it. Most people who are successful at dating, which includes alpha males (top 20% of all men who have sex with 80% of all women), CAN'T OR WON'T give constructive advice that an aspie man can actually work with. Can't, because they know social/sexual communication stuff intuitively, like swinging their arms while walking. Won't, because it's in their instinct to keep beta males away from "their" women. So they only give platitudes like:
* "Just go out and talk to women" when you've been doing that already
* "Be yourself", when your "self" is what makes you fail, while their "self" lets them meet women left and right
* "Be cocky and funny" with no concrete examples whatsoever (David DeAngelo)
* "Have more confidence" with no pointers on how to actually do that, when they magically already know how
* "Be romantic" when you already have more than enough romance to give
Therefore, their advice ranges from worthless to downright harmful, due to its confusion factor, and at times, deliberately setting up people to fail. By contrast, advice from people who also fail at meeting women comes from someone aspie men empathize with, and vice versa. Also, a quick word about TV: art imitates life! Ideas about those vicious wives on TV have to come from somewhere; it's not something producers pull out of thin air. So while the TV is not perfect, it's a good early warning tool for dangers aspie men can face.
It's why relationship advice from people who constantly fail at dating (thus confirming their preconcieved notions) is more valuable in their eyes than people who can have successful relationships (whom they generally ignore and dismiss, at least on this forum)
There's a damn good reason for it. Most people who are successful at dating, which includes alpha males (top 20% of all men who have sex with 80% of all women), CAN'T OR WON'T give constructive advice that an aspie man can actually work with. Can't, because they know social/sexual communication stuff intuitively, like swinging their arms while walking. Won't, because it's in their instinct to keep beta males away from "their" women. So they only give platitudes like:
* "Just go out and talk to women" when you've been doing that already
* "Be yourself", when your "self" is what makes you fail, while their "self" lets them meet women left and right
* "Be cocky and funny" with no concrete examples whatsoever (David DeAngelo)
* "Have more confidence" with no pointers on how to actually do that, when they magically already know how
* "Be romantic" when you already have more than enough romance to give
Therefore, their advice ranges from worthless to downright harmful, due to its confusion factor, and at times, deliberately setting up people to fail. By contrast, advice from people who also fail at meeting women comes from someone aspie men empathize with, and vice versa. Also, a quick word about TV: art imitates life! Ideas about those vicious wives on TV have to come from somewhere; it's not something producers pull out of thin air. So while the TV is not perfect, it's a good early warning tool for dangers aspie men can face.
lol!
Like I said. They aren't Misogynists, they just don't know any better. Thanks for proving my point.
It's why relationship advice from people who constantly fail at dating (thus confirming their preconcieved notions) is more valuable in their eyes than people who can have successful relationships (whom they generally ignore and dismiss, at least on this forum)
There's a damn good reason for it. Most people who are successful at dating, which includes alpha males (top 20% of all men who have sex with 80% of all women), CAN'T OR WON'T give constructive advice that an aspie man can actually work with. Can't, because they know social/sexual communication stuff intuitively, like swinging their arms while walking. Won't, because it's in their instinct to keep beta males away from "their" women. So they only give platitudes like:
* "Just go out and talk to women" when you've been doing that already
* "Be yourself", when your "self" is what makes you fail, while their "self" lets them meet women left and right
* "Be cocky and funny" with no concrete examples whatsoever (David DeAngelo)
* "Have more confidence" with no pointers on how to actually do that, when they magically already know how
* "Be romantic" when you already have more than enough romance to give
Therefore, their advice ranges from worthless to downright harmful, due to its confusion factor, and at times, deliberately setting up people to fail. By contrast, advice from people who also fail at meeting women comes from someone aspie men empathize with, and vice versa. Also, a quick word about TV: art imitates life! Ideas about those vicious wives on TV have to come from somewhere; it's not something producers pull out of thin air. So while the TV is not perfect, it's a good early warning tool for dangers aspie men can face.
lol!
Like I said. They aren't Misogynists, they just don't know any better. Thanks for proving my point.
I agree, it's usually more of a delusional thing than a sexist thing, though that can be difficult to distinguish unless you've been around long enough to see the pattern.
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez
androbot01
Veteran
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
I agree, it's usually more of a delusional thing than a sexist thing, though that can be difficult to distinguish unless you've been around long enough to see the pattern.
That takes the element of malice out of it. Interesting to look at it this way.
I don't know if they are likely to be misogynistic, but perhaps, we are one of the most observant about them. I've had moments where my point of view on women are misogynistic, but those views were based off of observations about the characters of most of the women I have met. I don't know if, for most guys, it's an act of fear, an act of jealousy, an act of misinformation about interactions of the opposite sex or truly an act of disgust at certain parts of one's mannerisms, but what you can say is that those within the disorder are more likely to be open about such discomfort.
_________________
I'm not strange. I'm just drawn that way. That being said, work on your drawing skills already!
androbot01
Veteran
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
I can relate to your frustration, having suffered many experiences like those in the past, but I don't consider it fair to call women "superficial" just because they have certain preferences for a romantic partner. Presumably we're not talking about an ordinary friendship here, in which case it wouldn't matter what you look like. We're talking about a relationship with a sexual element thrown into the mix, and the fact of the matter is that both men and women would rather have sex with whomever they find physically attractive. If you're like me and most other guys, you doubtless feel the same, so you can't fairly take women to task for valuing attractiveness the way we all do.
Honestly your whole attitude appears symptomatic of a larger trend in today's society to resent attractive people for having their own standards that we don't live up to, calling them "shallow" even though it's their appearance that draws us towards them in the first place. And as the average American waistline continues to balloon thanks to the abundance of cheap hi-calorie food and modern convenience, unfortunately a larger proportion of us just happen to be sinking towards the bottom of the sexual desirability barrel due to our less healthy physiques. Certainly the whole "fat acceptance" movement is spearheaded by overweight women who feel inconvenienced by conventional beauty standards, just as you have a lot of overweight men with scruffy necks endorsing MRA- or PUA-style misogyny. That's why I've come to believe the inter-gender warfare you see all over the Internet is driven more than anything else by the swelling tide of sexual frustration in wake of our obesity epidemic.
never said it was about looks. sure being told I'm ugly and not attractive sucks and i can't change it but I can understand it even though it makes me feel horrible.
i cal them superficial for there you have to have car, home, great job. etc. valueing people on what they own, how much they make, and that these values are far more important then if the guy looks attractive or is a a**hole. its money/objects first, check he has that now lets look at his looks and personality.
I only care about peoples personality and somewhat looks. as i want a relationship not a business partnership. I want to love the person and be loved back not be tolerated for as long as I make enough to be in the business partnership. people seem to go into relationships treating it like a business rather than a relationship. how much does he make now, will he have promotions in his future. if not pass even if he meets 99% of all my other wants, drives me crazy attraction wise and all my family would love him.that is superficial no?
sure such businesspartnerships can last as long as both parties keep getting promoted. don't know whats worse guys wanting a woman who looks nice to f**k or women only caring about how much a guy makes and if he can keep getting promoted. both make me depressed.
androbot01
Veteran
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
This is the kind of faulty thinking that leads to misogyny. There are no standards that if met will result in a girlfriend. Relationships form organically out of life.
........
Sly, stay off internet dating sites. Spend some time out in the real world. Personally, I think you're a sweetie, but the pot won't boil if you don't stop staring at it. Relationships are things that happen naturally as a result of living life.
idealy and in the past yes. but todays world no. people have super high standards, perhaps from all they everyone is #1 you're entitled to success. you can do anything. you're super amazing. nonsense they've been told growing up. meeting the requirements won't guarantee you a gf, but not meeting them will guarantee you won't get one. you have to meet thier requirements to be allowed to talk to them and that is where the organic bonding happens.
You are assuming that all women's "standards" are the same.
no just most. and mostly just the women in my state. I can't guess how women are in other states or nations as I haven't dealt with them. if anything the few I have all seem great, making me wonder if this is mostly a US problem. but that's limited to 3 canadians, and 2 women from philippians. hardly as large of a data point as the over 4k women in my city/state. i haven't even dealt too many women out of my city area, but the ones I saw shared the same standards. leaves me striving to meet those standards while at the same time sicken by them to the point i won't date them probably just reject them when they accept me. depressed cause where does that leave me, nowhere. I don't feel i should have to change to be loved, I won't date someone who only will date me while I'm in good times but soon as i lose my job or don't get promoted ditch me for something better. the ones who aren't like that seem to all be married or in a relationship, so guess I could be a parasite and wait for them to break up(seems wrong and unlikely anyways as they happy together.) I can't afford to move, and due to my hobbies I can't live in anywhere but the US anyways. so i stuck here waiting to die pointlessly looking for work even though it will never help me obtain love cause i'm not good enough now and they won't be good enough ever.
