Men & Women Please Answer...

[Nolan1971]

@ Spinning Compass I agree the traditional roles are unfair. The old way put all the financial burden on the man which was never fair.
All the burdens should be shared equally so neither partner gets crushed under it.

 

[Biblio-Love]

The problem with the "traditional" roles for men and women is that historically they have been lopsided. I remember a time not so very long ago that if you were born female, being a wife and mother was your ONLY identity, regardless of what other talents and interests and abilities you might have. Perhaps the women's movement did go overboard in not honoring a woman's choice to be a wife and mother, but I am very concerned that those women who do feel called to such a lifestyle do not shortchange their daughters by not letting them know they do have choices.

On the other hand, while men have traditionally been socialized to be the provider, I know of no man whose PRIMARY identity is HUSBAND and FATHER. Men have careers, accomplishments, recognition outside of the home and outside of the role. They are not raised to be in someone else's shadow. The problem with separate but equal spheres is oftentimes it is more separate than equal. In the name of protectiing the home and supporting the man's role as provider/protector, women have been DENIED education (especially college--a waste of time and money if all you are going to do is stay home and raise children), they have been DENIED the right to own property and control their own money, they have been DENIED the right to vote, and so on and so forth. There is a long history of discrimination and limiting women in the name of the family and I think that this has been forgotten or never learned by those who want to go back to traditional roles.

And, what about those women who were raised to think of themselves primarily as wives and mothers, who put aside education and learning job skills because they believed the myth that someone else would take care of them only to find that things did not go according to plan and they have to support themselves and their children because the man who was supposed to do all these things is no longer in their lives for one reason or another? Or a woman finds herself in an abusive relationship but is unable to leave because she is unable to take care of herself? There is NO guarantee in life that there will always be someone around to do the providing. It seems to me that smart men would recognize this fact and want the women in their lives to be able to stand on their own two feet.

I agree with this completely! Feminism, at least for me, is about choice (for both genders). Traditional roles can be very limiting for men as well. What man wants to work all the time and be like a stranger to his children?

The problem I see with many modern couples that I know (myself included), is that women can now work or pursue their interests but - damn - there better be dinner on the table. And primary childcare still falls to the woman, regardless what else she has going on. I know this one very successful woman who makes more money than her husband, but his job and interests still takes precidence over hers, and if a child needs to stay home she misses work, not him. It makes NO sense to men since her job pays more and she feels her husband doesn't step up as much as he should in child-care. I do more domestic type stuff than my husband, but that is fine with me - I make less money and frankly, I want to be with my daughter, but that is the arrangement we agreed upon and I am fine with it. Modern roles are more complicated now, and each couple has to figure it out what works best for them.

 

[Nolan1971]

I actually want to be the stay at home dad while I give Butterfly Lady the chance to keep working.
I have always believed in true sharing of all responsibilities though.

 

[Dragon's Tooth]

The problem with the "traditional" roles for men and women is that historically they have been lopsided. I remember a time not so very long ago that if you were born female, being a wife and mother was your ONLY identity, regardless of what other talents and interests and abilities you might have. Perhaps the women's movement did go overboard in not honoring a woman's choice to be a wife and mother, but I am very concerned that those women who do feel called to such a lifestyle do not shortchange their daughters by not letting them know they do have choices.

On the other hand, while men have traditionally been socialized to be the provider, I know of no man whose PRIMARY identity is HUSBAND and FATHER. Men have careers, accomplishments, recognition outside of the home and outside of the role. They are not raised to be in someone else's shadow. The problem with separate but equal spheres is oftentimes it is more separate than equal. In the name of protectiing the home and supporting the man's role as provider/protector, women have been DENIED education (especially college--a waste of time and money if all you are going to do is stay home and raise children), they have been DENIED the right to own property and control their own money, they have been DENIED the right to vote, and so on and so forth. There is a long history of discrimination and limiting women in the name of the family and I think that this has been forgotten or never learned by those who want to go back to traditional roles.

And, what about those women who were raised to think of themselves primarily as wives and mothers, who put aside education and learning job skills because they believed the myth that someone else would take care of them only to find that things did not go according to plan and they have to support themselves and their children because the man who was supposed to do all these things is no longer in their lives for one reason or another? Or a woman finds herself in an abusive relationship but is unable to leave because she is unable to take care of herself? There is NO guarantee in life that there will always be someone around to do the providing. It seems to me that smart men would recognize this fact and want the women in their lives to be able to stand on their own two feet.

Finally, I am rather disturbed at what Truck said about only looking for sexual gratification rather than relationships. Sexual gratification with WHAT? A shoe? A blow-up doll? I'm sorry, that sounds cold and calculating and selfish. Sex, if I understand it correctly, is supposed to be a dance between two partners, not a one-way street. At the risk of sounding insulting, that is exactly how pedophiles and rapists think. They don't care about the other person's sexual gratification, only their own. And that is why we hear about children, even infants, being sexually assaulted, why we hear about women being given knockout drugs, etc. because it is all about ME, ME, ME and what I want. And we all know, if it feels good, do it. If you want it, take it. To hell with the other person. I WANT, I WANT, I WANT. Oh, yes, Truck, I know your kind quite well, and it is people like you that have ruined relationships for me. For that I thank you very kindly. Isn't this world hell?

I think you missed the point a bit some of us other women were trying to make.

We aren't saying "Women can only be in the kitchen and their talents shouldn't exceed cooking, cleaning and raising children". Well I wasn't. I'm just annoyed that if I find my calling in life is to raise some beautiful children then I shouldn't be looked down on for wanting that as my crowning achievement in life. I would also in no way support a woman staying in an abusive relationship.

I actually want to stay home with the children so I can raise career minded successful children and give them what I missed out on. I was largely ignored growing up (my sister has a potentially life threatening disease which means she needs a lot of constant monitoring) and my mum has even admitted that she thought I would turn out alright if she focused on the others. As I was the quiet one who was largely occupying herself, it was easy to see how my talents got missed ... especially when I come from a family with four children. I want to nurture my children and have them grow up with the intelligence, drive to learn and imaginations intact. Something that I haven't really survived to adulthood with. And with education systems in a lot of countries being about giving parents free day care so they can work ... I question if putting my children into these systems just to be churned out like another number is going to be the best thing for them. Especially in the country I live in where science and maths is no longer considered a subject worthwhile taking.

Spinning compass ... I take a bit of issue for you saying what you have about Truck. At least he's honest. At least he's being up front. And if he's up front to women about this sort of thing then they can choose to be his gratification or move on. What is the issue? I actually feel a bit for him because it sounds to me like he has become a bit jaded about relationships and just given up on them. I think your religious ideals have sold you something you can't aspire too Spinning Compass ... kind of like the prince of the white stead ideal disney sells us.

Also I never put education on the back burner ... until recently I always assumed I would be a fiearcly independent woman who never had children and didn't need anyone or if I did marry I would be the bread winner. I now find myself in the opposite situation. And you know what ... there is no shame in a woman wanting to be a good wife to her husband. And I take issue at you basically saying what every feminist has basically forced down my throat. I'm allowed to choose the needs of any future children over the need for a career.

Also I think you will find that many men have a primary identity that is a husband and father. They just don't seem to have it because everyone looks to their careers first. I'm sure many men would identify themselves primarily as fathers and/or husbands if people would look past their careers. A lot of men get up and go to work and have careers to PROVIDE for their families. Even split families.

 

[Undiagnosed]

I see no shame at all in your role Dragons Tooth. I often wonder about the effects of being practicly raised in daycare ends up haveing on kids. I mean if a mother has a so called 'important' career and her kids are in day care many hours each day and then when they get home Mom (and Dad) must be tired due to a long work day and mabey preocupied with what's going on at work and kids go to bed earley anyway and where is the family?? But this woman is idolized as "haveing it all". I HAD to have my kids in daycare becouse I was the only parent and had to work, provide, and try to find something left inside me with which to be a Mom, which wasn't usually there becouse I was depleated, stressed, and drained from trying to provide basic survival for my kids and myself. I didn't live in the pre feminism days so can't say what it really would have been like but I imagion it wasn't as bad as fiminism makes it out to be. Yea the down side is that some woman may have been 'stuck' in abusive relationships, but guess what women still are. They stay with abusive men due to fear, financial reasons, emotionals attachments, or whatever reasons. And the thing is when someone dose get out of a bad relationship of whatever kind I often see then turn to another bad relationship with similar but different issues. Lets not try to tell ourselves that Feminism fixed that problem. I would also imagion that even though a woman didn't have the same rights that dosn't mean they couldn't express their own interests, tallents, and personal abilities. Seems to me that it was more that the social norms of the time demanded that a married woman make her husband and children priority. But hey it went both ways Men were expected to be Men as well to support their family and be the backbone of the sturcture. I don't see what's so bad about all that. Today ofen times marrage is obviousley not the prority (apparent by the divorce rate) and children unfortunatley arn't either. We try to say they are but honestley .... the kind of care some of our modern kids get today I imagion would be appoleing to the 1950's family. I say More Power to you Drangs Tooth. Rase your kids and be proud that you are doning the most important job you can do. And I hope you will raise them to feel that it's ok to be career minded and it's also ok to be family minded.

 

[Undiagnosed]

And also Spinning I don't think you need to be ....."concerned that those women who do feel called to such a lifestyle do not shortchange their daughters by not letting them know they do have choices." I'm pretty shure it's nerley impossable for a girl to live in this day without knowing she has choices. And what about the women who are "shortchanged" out of the content and fullfillment they may have had as a wife and mother due to feeling they are not liveing up to potential that OTHER people had in mind for them. That is a Shortchanged woman as well. i.e. Dragon's Tooth who feels she needs to defend herself to feminism!!

 

[abinun1987]

I have had only 3 relationships in my life... all three of them were rather spontaneous and were the result of myself and my partner both being either equally desperate or naive. My first 2 relationships weren't much but the third lasted 5 years. In that time, we spent nearly every day together and we would often get into lengthy discussions and talk for hours on end about our views of the world and of ourselves. It's much easier for me to speak deeply about myself and speak my mind, but it's harder for me to do much else. I think I've only had the relationships I've had because I managed to gain some stroke of luck in that regard... otherwise, people barely notice me at all and whenever I attempt to join in a conversation, I seem really out of place or alienate myself because I don't know how to interact well.

But I always figured that I would be a great friend and lover overall simply because I will listen to everything and will talk ad nauseum for hours just to get a further understanding and build a deep connection. But, with regard to my previous partners, they weren't all exactly part of the average status quo, so I don't know if this would hold up well with a socially acceptable NT.

 

[Spinning Compass]

Perhaps I have been sold a bunch of bullcrap about sex. I freely admit it. However, would I have been better off if I'd just sucked it in and spread my legs for whoever? Regardless of how I felt about it?

A few years ago when my community theater was doing "Hair", there was an incident that happened during rehearsal. The director had told the mostly underage cast that they were free to make out sexually onstage and of course being teenagers they all went to it with gusto while he stood back and watched with glee. Well, not all. Apparently there was one cast member who was visibly uncomfortable at being approached in such a manner but being a good sport and not wanting to appear prudish, etc., etc. just put up with the kissing and the groping. But the accompanist saw what the director could not or would not, and she went to him about it.

At the very next rehearsal he called a cast meeting and said, "I know I told you you could act out sexually on stage but Nancy has informed me that she saw at least one person who was not comfortable with being kissed and touched. I want to remind you that sexual harassment is a very serious issue and that YOU SHOULD GET THE CONSENT OF THE PERSON YOU ARE TOUCHING OR KISSING."

Now, he could have said, "Look, this play is all about shedding inhibitions and hangups and if you aren't willing to get with the program then you really ought to rethink whether you should be in this play." He could have said all the things that have been said to me all the years on the subject, including the remark about religion and Disneyland. Oh, yes, I have heard it all. But he did not. Why?

Because if word had gotten out in this largely conservative community that the openly gay director was not only turning a blind eye but actively encouraging unwanted sexual contact between minors--if word had gotten out that he was telling those who objected, "Put up or shut up or get out"--he would have been finished as a director and possibly we would have been finished as a theater. People in my area are kind of funny about those things, you know. And they just happen to have the law on their side.

Recently a high school student started a "No means No" campaign after she was raped by a fellow student. Now you would think that people would admire her for speaking up--and some did. But there were others who basically said that it was her own fault for getting raped, she shouldn't have been alone with him, she shouldn't have trusted him, and so forth. Yes, this kind of thinking is alive and well in 2013.

It seems to me that as a society we are sending out contradictory messages regarding nonconsensual sexual contact. On one hand we say that a person has the right to say no but on the other hand when that person exercises that right we call them all kinds of names, make remarks about their character, and generally bully them into submission and silence. That is why that cast member did not speak up. (And no, it wasn't me.)

All I am saying to those who are out for sexual gratification alone is please remember the other person is a human being not an object. Don't just blindly dive in. Get their consent first. And yes, I happen to feel very strongly about this matter because no one ever asked my consent. Never. It was always about what THEY wanted. Well, I don't agree and if that makes me brainwashed, if that makes me hung-up, repressed, well, I stand proudly beside this courageous teen who also says "No means No."

 

[xubly]

AS Female. I've been with my husband for 7 years. In all these years, I knew we were both completely different compare to other 'normal' couples. When we both discovered AS, it actually brought us closer together. We were able to understand each other better and why we were the way we are. All it took was communicating on levels where both could compromise and comprehend. To be honest, it's extremely hard to deal with my husband from time to time. He tends to shut down his emotions whenever he feels them getting bigger. When I asked him about it, he told me that was how he could be in control of himself. I don't think it's exactly good for our relationship since to me it feels like he's pushing me away along with his emotions;but, I'm always trying my hardest to tell him how I feel about what he's doing to us and I can see he's willing to try with me. We both love each other with all of our hearts and always have. It takes two to make a relationship work. When it's love, it really is explainable. Either way, that is the main reason why we are still together. I guess it's different for everyone, but there is hope for everyone on here and out there too

 

[Undiagnosed]

I am a man.

I have had trouble keeping relationships going, but I don't think that's different than most people. Afterall, half of all marriages end in divorce today. I've also had been with enough women to notice my relationships have all followed a similar pattern.

These days I don't pursue long term relations. I'm only looking for sexual gratification because my relationships have been too stressful.

Spinning, If this is the statment you are refering to,, you are putting extra implications into it more than what he is actually saying. I take it that he is not interested in long term relationships at this time but he is still interested in haveing sex. That dosn't necessarily mean he dosn't get the others persons consent or want the other person to be equally satisfied. I have fealt the same way at times in my life. I didn't have it in me at the time to think about a seroius connection but still would like some sexual satisfaction, and not only that but some physical clossness with another human being. Dosn't mean I would TAKE it regardless of the other persons feelings. In my case it meant I wanted a mutaly attraction between the both of us and a mutual understanding that we were both in it for. I also would always want for the both of us to want and enjoy it. I don't see in Trucks statment anything different than my experience.

 

[laurag9g9g9]

The longer I am on this forum and read threads and posts I am starting to get an idea about Aspie's and relationships (I am talking about male/ female couple relationships). The drift I am getting is that Aspie men are not easy to accept for women in a relationship but aspie women don't have the same trouble from the man in a relationship....Is this right??

Please answer .....
1. are you Male or Female? and
2. Do yu or have you hade trouble keeping a relationship with the oposite sex? i.e. has the other person leaft or been unhappy /unsatisfied with you in the relationship or relationships? or vise versa?

I am starting to form a theory that Men in relationships (probably both neurtypical and aspie) don't seek, need, or crave the level of emotional attachment and conversation that women do. Women in general already have this problem with men in general. So I am thinking aspie men are even further off in this issue (than newuotypical men) and that's why women in general have a hard time haveing or staying in a relationship with them. And that women who are aspie don't have the same problem becouse their lower level of emotional need, connection, or conversation would actually close the natural male female gap.???
I don't know this is just something I am wondering about and hope some people will answer to see if this is true than women seem to leave or be unsatisfied with aspie men yet men seem to be ok with aspie women??

I am pretty dormant in that area. Im a 53 yr old aspie girl. When I took aspie quiz and saved it PDF...it explains in better detail why. I could talk for a while on this

 

[eonbus]

are you guys not getting the point? relationships take much progress. god you people will never see the daylight.

 

[metalminx24]

are you guys not getting the point? relationships take much progress. god you people will never see the daylight.

Thank you for the enlightenment, oh eloquent and charming oracle...

 

[Lealea]

the last relationship i had lasted 9 years with a non aspie, so all of my adult life and was great im not a touchy feely person and definatly not emotional or empathetic and i didnt have no objections when he wanted to go out with his friends because i enjoy my alone time. the problem actualy started when he got depressed and wouldnt get out of bed or spend time with his family or friends. I sympathised as best i could but it got to much me.

 

[Jonathan Lees]

im an aspie male, i have had a couple of relationships and from my experiences i cant agree, i am always personally looking for deep emotional attachment and to be honest in most of my relationships I've been the one to end it due to a lack of commitment and seriousness from the other person (often not an aspie).
i think that it is a fallacy that aspies have less emotional need, im very emotional but very repressed and find it hard to communicate my feeling due to Asperger's it does not mean i don't have any or even fewer emotional needs than a neurotypical.
i know for a fact that many aspies (male and female) have very long term serious loving and successful relationships. the problem you have identified im sure exists for some aspies but certainly not for all

 

[ChurchTheArtist]

I am starting to form a theory that Men in relationships (probably both neurtypical and aspie) don't seek, need, or crave the level of emotional attachment and conversation that women do. Women in general already have this problem with men in general. So I am thinking aspie men are even further off in this issue (than newuotypical men) and that's why women in general have a hard time haveing or staying in a relationship with them. And that women who are aspie don't have the same problem becouse their lower level of emotional need, connection, or conversation would actually close the natural male female gap.???

Like all things that may seem all encompassing, there can always be shown exceptions. I for one feel the opposite has been my case. Due to geographical culture having completely alien styles from region to region you may find that some places are either swapped from the status quo or just plain dead as dirt.

I personally crave emotional attachment and conversation in relationships. My favorite experience so far was with a girl who could hold her own in conversations with me for hours each day, every day of the week, for six months straight. We connected on a level far greater than most people as observed by my family and friends because our minds were both in sync and constantly craving the other. It was also healthy and not codependant. Neither of us required the other's attention to keep us from killing ourselves, so to speak. Instead, we just became each other's favorite buddy and we always wanted to spend time talking about our feelings to each other. For me there is no other thing to look for in compatibility than that very connection.

Yes, typical guys don't always need that but some men do. It's partially cultural as well as upbringing and experience. Men compartmentalize their thoughts and feelings whereas women interconnect all their thoughts and feelings, most men come off as emotionally detached and get repelled by the emotional needs of a female. But really it doesn't mean that some men couldn't have the emotional desires that women have; instead it means when a man does in fact have such a craving, it means that his emotional capacity (still independently compartmentalized) is far greater than many of his other facets.

After that, the manner in which a guy/man shares and seeks this connection will point to emotional maturity. Think of it like this:

That being said- a man can have a box labeled "Emotional connection." This box can be big or small, it can be full or empty, he can take it out and share it with anyone or he may reserve it for that special one, it may be cluttered or it may be tidy. These analogies point to emotional capacity, emotional purity, emotional value and emotional maturity.

When you say:

And that women who are aspie don't have the same problem becouse their lower level of emotional need, connection, or conversation would actually close the natural male female gap.???

I think it is a misunderstanding. Aspie women do not have a lower level of emotional need. It may seem that way do to social distancing, miscommunications, fear and personality but I can assure you that aspie women (if addressed as a whole) do still need that emotional connection just like any NT woman. The only reason why they wouldn't would be based on a conscious level fear or decision (such as compromised standards due to loneliness or fear) and not from an unconscious level rooted in their nature. We aspies as a whole often get misread as having a low capacity or connectivity with emotions but if you truly watch and empathize with them over time you will see that we aspies can show a great capacity for emotional connection.

It's all about depth of understanding what cannot be seen to the naked eye.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

I am a man, and I've only had one previous relationship. It ended very badly, multiple times, and for several reasons. But one of them, in my opinion, was my difficulty with empathy...especially regarding her history. Unknown to either of us back then, I was an Aspie...and while that doesn't excuse my behavior in the least, it does provide some explanation for it. I've struggled with controlling my emotions all my life, especially the negative ones like anger or fear. When my ex-girlfriend and I were first together, I was on top of the world. But after she left me the first time, my trust in her was broken. I wanted desperately to regain or rebuild it, and tried like crazy...but something always went wrong. I couldn't get the past out of my mind, and lived in terror of losing her again. This affected my behavior, which in turn influenced her responses. She knew I didn't trust her completely, but it was hard for me to admit because I wanted to so badly.