I had a flirt session the other day. Ran into her again today. What to make of her behavior?

[GoodMan32]

There is self-esteem damage that comes with taking rejections. At a certain point, if a man takes enough rejections without any successes, then he's going to dislike asking women to go on dates. My sense is that your self-esteem is in the toilet from too many rejections with little to no success.

Indeed.

I've only ever had one success from making a move on a woman.

Obviously I've had other "successes" too (I've mentioned on posts that I've had 9 non-escort sex partners...and have gone on dates with several gals)

But I don't "count" the vast majority of those as successes (for the purpose of calculating my rejection rate at least)...because all my other "successes" came from either tech methods, the woman making the move on me, or instances that just sort of happened (with neither party officially making the move)

I'm glad you acknowledge the fact a man will dislike asking a woman out if he takes too many rejections with little to no success. Most posters don't seem to understand that. Hell, the idea has even been floated on this forum that a man gets over his aversion to rejection by getting rejected a lot (the total opposite is true in my experience)

 

[SW15]

I'm glad you acknowledge the fact a man will dislike asking a woman out if he takes too many rejections with little to no success. Most posters don't seem to understand that. Hell, the idea has even been floated on this forum that a man gets over his aversion to rejection by getting rejected a lot (the total opposite is true in my experience)

Getting rejected a lot does take its toll.

There's a bit of failure involved in approaching strangers. Ideally, the rejections/failures are learning experiences. They might lead to some personal growth in terms of looks, money, status, and personality.

Getting rejected without making adjustments or having personal growth from rejections/failed early stage dates is not going to be beneficial.

 

[characternote]

Ideally, the rejections/failures are learning experiences.

I think unless you are extremely odd then typically there's nothing to 'learn' from a rejection other than, You just weren't her type.
A different opener or transition or some gamey technique is basically never gonna drastically change teh interaction in a 'groundhog day' situation where you get to make the same exact approach again

 

[SW15]

I think unless you are extremely odd then typically there's nothing to 'learn' from a rejection other than, You just weren't her type.

I am able to identify with your point. I think your idea has some truth to it. I don't think it is the entire reality.

There are lessons that can be learned from failed stranger approaches that lead to rejections.

Rejections on approaches can happen for many reasons.

Not being her type is one general reason. A man might also be approaching too many of the wrong women. He might be interacting with too many women with boyfriends who aren't interested in a new penis. However, even women with boyfriends are open to monkey branching if the deal offered by the next guy is better than what she has with her boyfriend. In practice, this is difficult to achieve, especially in a 3-10 minute initial conversation off of an approach in a nightlife venue or non-bar venue.

Daygame is difficult because of its randomness and a lot of women will have boyfriends (or even husbands if the man picks bad venues) and it won't lead to anything.

I rarely ever get IHAB'ed but beginner approachers are known to get IHAB'ed on a regular basis. For those unfamiliar, IHAB - I Have a Boyfriend.

A man might be approaching too many women who are too good looking for him. If a man is mid-tier in looks and he's only approaching women who are 8.5+ in looks, this isn't going to go well unless he has enough money, status, or personality to make up the difference. Usually, those factors aren't present.

There are men also choosing the wrong venues for approach. They might be going to supermarkets in neighborhoods with more married/attached women and they might be better off going to a supermarket in an area with more unattached people. There are countless other examples like this.

After doing some approaches, a man might realize he needs to take a few months off, improve his muscle size in the gym, and then start re-approaching.

I think the more difficult scenario to fix is a scenario where a man is getting a lot of early stage dates but the dates are all failing. He's having the 1-2 dates, no sex, no extended relationship scenario.

A different opener or transition or some gamey technique is basically never gonna drastically change teh interaction in a 'groundhog day' situation where you get to make the same exact approach again

Openers can matter, but looks matter more. Good looks and a weak opener might work in some situations.

Wheat Waffles analyzed the recorded field approaches of a Sub 5 in looks vs. approaches from an above average/borderline top tier guy in looks. Both had what I would consider weaker verbal game. The way women reacted to their weaker verbal games differed a lot based on looks. The Sub 5 got treated far worse by women.

 

[GoodMan32]

Getting rejected a lot does take its toll.

There's a bit of failure involved in approaching strangers. Ideally, the rejections/failures are learning experiences. They might lead to some personal growth in terms of looks, money, status, and personality.

Getting rejected without making adjustments or having personal growth from rejections/failed early stage dates is not going to be beneficial.

Some of my approaches have been on total strangers (like the phase I went through where I'd ask total strangers for sex)

Some of my approaches have been on gals I already knew on varying levels.

Here's my core problem: Other than rare exceptions like @BeExcellent's husband, the vast majority of the female population will never find an autist sexually exciting.

In other words, I'm destined to fail...thanks to a condition that's beyond my control.

That would explain why a lot of the non-escort sex I've had came from Craigslist gals who didn't have a chance to get to know me (some of the Craigslist gals quite literally drove to my apartment for sex after exchanging only a few messages on Craigslist)

It would also explain my high rejection rate on in-person approaches, as well as the fact it's rare for a woman to remain into me for long (whether we met in person or online)

I'd probably have better luck with the ladies if I were ugly but neurotypical.

 

[GoodMan32]

I am able to identify with your point. I think your idea has some truth to it. I don't think it is the entire reality.

There are lessons that can be learned from failed stranger approaches that lead to rejections.

Rejections on approaches can happen for many reasons.

Not being her type is one general reason. A man might also be approaching too many of the wrong women. He might be interacting with too many women with boyfriends who aren't interested in a new penis. However, even women with boyfriends are open to monkey branching if the deal offered by the next guy is better than what she has with her boyfriend. In practice, this is difficult to achieve, especially in a 3-10 minute initial conversation off of an approach in a nightlife venue or non-bar venue.

Daygame is difficult because of its randomness and a lot of women will have boyfriends (or even husbands if the man picks bad venues) and it won't lead to anything.

I rarely ever get IHAB'ed but beginner approachers are known to get IHAB'ed on a regular basis. For those unfamiliar, IHAB - I Have a Boyfriend.

A man might be approaching too many women who are too good looking for him. If a man is mid-tier in looks and he's only approaching women who are 8.5+ in looks, this isn't going to go well unless he has enough money, status, or personality to make up the difference. Usually, those factors aren't present.

There are men also choosing the wrong venues for approach. They might be going to supermarkets in neighborhoods with more married/attached women and they might be better off going to a supermarket in an area with more unattached people. There are countless other examples like this.

After doing some approaches, a man might realize he needs to take a few months off, improve his muscle size in the gym, and then start re-approaching.

I think the more difficult scenario to fix is a scenario where a man is getting a lot of early stage dates but the dates are all failing. He's having the 1-2 dates, no sex, no extended relationship scenario.



Openers can matter, but looks matter more. Good looks and a weak opener might work in some situations.

Wheat Waffles analyzed the recorded field approaches of a Sub 5 in looks vs. approaches from an above average/borderline top tier guy in looks. Both had what I would consider weaker verbal game. The way women reacted to their weaker verbal games differed a lot based on looks. The Sub 5 got treated far worse by women.

Your post mentioned the fact some gals are willing to cheat on a boyfriend. What I'm going to say next ties in with the topic.

As I said on my last post, I had some Craigslist gals drive straight to my apartment for sex after exchanging only a few messages on Craigslist.

Some had a more lengthy exchange with me before coming over (but still didn't fully get to know me)

Here's a plot twist: The 2 gals who came straight to my apartment after only a few messages had boyfriends (one girl was even an amateur model; the other one had good looks too). They were 22 and 24.

It amazes me that 2 good-looking girls became convinced to cheat on their boyfriend with me simply from seeing my Craigslist ad/exchanging a few messages with me, yet I can't get same-day sex from an in-person approach if my life depended on it.

As for the video, I'm proof that a man can be above average in looks yet still get treated poorly by the ladies he expresses interest in.

 

[SW15]

the vast majority of the female population will never find an autist sexually exciting.

I'm destined to fail...thanks to a condition that's beyond my control.

Your biggest problems are on the personality side of looks, money, status, and personality. However, you also have significant problems on looks, money, and status too.

The good news on a personality problem is that personality is less important than looks, money, or status.

You haven't done enough on looks, money, and status to offset your personality issues. You also have done a poor job managing your personality conditions in addition to receiving subpar psychological treatment. Part of that is on you, while part of it is on the psychotherapists that have treated you. Those psychotherapists are an embarrassment to the profession based on their work with you.

You got dealt a bad hand. Everyone who participates on this forum and has tried to help you gets it. However, you haven't done the things you can do in order to improve your situation.

Your chest and shoulders are not absolutely shredded. Overall, on physique, you would need to be top tier to offset your personality issues. You should be at a gym lifting weights at least 5 days a week unless you get big.

If an autist who had taken some management efforts to manage autism had 12-15% body fat, nice defined muscles, worked as a bouncer at a strip club/regular nightclub because he also knew how to fight (Boxing, martial arts, or MMA), and rode a motorcycle, he would be getting pussie. He'd also be getting pussie from strippers and hot female bartenders. Looks > Personality

You do have to fix your mindset issues too as @BackInTheGame78 and @Gamisch have told you multiple times.

As you yourself have said, your problems go beyond mere autism.

my struggles with the ladies go way beyond mere social awkwardness

I was having a DM discussion with another member where I mentioned how my struggles with the ladies go beyond mere social awkwardness/ASD. Come to think of it, I suppose the topic warrants its own thread. In addition to my ASD/social awkwardness, there are many other factors working against me...

www.sosuave.net

ugly but neurotypical.

How ugly? Attraction and seduction is based on looks, money, status, and personality. Being ugly means you are doing poorly in the most important category.

You are in a better positioned that someone who has been physically disfigured. You are better positioned than a homeless man.

 

[GoodMan32]

Your biggest problems are on the personality side of looks, money, status, and personality. However, you also have significant problems on looks, money, and status too.

The good news on a personality problem is that personality is less important than looks, money, or status.

You haven't done enough on looks, money, and status to offset your personality issues. You also have done a poor job managing your personality conditions in addition to receiving subpar psychological treatment. Part of that is on you, while part of it is on the psychotherapists that have treated you. Those psychotherapists are an embarrassment to the profession based on their work with you.

You got dealt a bad hand. Everyone who participates on this forum and has tried to help you gets it. However, you haven't done the things you can do in order to improve your situation.

Your chest and shoulders are not absolutely shredded. Overall, on physique, you would need to be top tier to offset your personality issues. You should be at a gym lifting weights at least 5 days a week unless you get big.

If an autist who had taken some management efforts to manage autism had 12-15% body fat, nice defined muscles, worked as a bouncer at a strip club/regular nightclub because he also knew how to fight (Boxing, martial arts, or MMA), and rode a motorcycle, he would be getting pussie. He'd also be getting pussie from strippers and hot female bartenders. Looks > Personality

You do have to fix your mindset issues too as @BackInTheGame78 and @Gamisch have told you multiple times.

As you yourself have said, your problems go beyond mere autism.

my struggles with the ladies go way beyond mere social awkwardness

I was having a DM discussion with another member where I mentioned how my struggles with the ladies go beyond mere social awkwardness/ASD. Come to think of it, I suppose the topic warrants its own thread. In addition to my ASD/social awkwardness, there are many other factors working against me...

www.sosuave.net

How ugly? Attraction and seduction is based on looks, money, status, and personality. Being ugly means you are doing poorly in the most important category.

You are in a better positioned that someone who has been physically disfigured. You are better positioned than a homeless man.

An autist can maybe get muscular if they work out enough, yeah. Overall, however, your hypothetical autist you described is unrealistic.

A night club is a miserable environment for an autist. No way would an autist want to work at one. Additionally, even if an autist is big, we lack the inner qualities that make a guy a good fighter.

My therapists were a joke, I agree. One therapist's solution to my fear of rejection? To simply accept that I might get rejected (yet any time I shared stories about how I developed my fear of rejection, she dismissed the stories with "thanks for sharing")

She also suggested my problem in attracting a woman might solve itself if I develop a social circle (I disagree. I had somewhat of a social circle in college, yet I had to use tech methods to get laid in college)

The male therapist wasn't much different. He basically just told me "If you're into a woman, come onto her. If you get rejected, so be it"

As for your question of how ugly (when I say I might have better luck with the ladies if I were ugly but neurotypical), I'm bad at rating men on a 1-10 scale. All I know is I've known neurotypical below average men (looks-wise) who have done well with the ladies.

I'm convinced I'm above average facially by the way, even if I don't have a football player body.

 

[SW15]

If an autist who had taken some management efforts to manage autism had 12-15% body fat, nice defined muscles, worked as a bouncer at a strip club/regular nightclub because he also knew how to fight (Boxing, martial arts, or MMA), and rode a motorcycle, he would be getting pussie. He'd also be getting pussie from strippers and hot female bartenders. Looks > Personality

An autist can maybe get muscular if they work out enough, yeah.

The muscles and the helpful mental therapy are the most important parts of that description. Then the motorcycle. The other stuff isn't as important.

Rollo Tomassi has said the following quote many times "Muscles, money, and game"

Get big muscles throughout your body. Muscles and mental health therapy are what you need.

Planet Fitness has $15 a month memberships. Though that's a subpar gym, you could make progress there. 24 Hour Fitness and LA Fitness are better chain gyms and their costs are reasonable.

She also suggested my problem in attracting a woman might solve itself if I develop a social circle (I disagree. I had somewhat of a social circle in college, yet I had to use tech methods to get laid in college)

She wasn't necessarily wrong but she also probably didn't help you with getting the tools to do it.

It is true that social circle is great for getting a girlfriend for the men with fortunate enough situations in life to have them. Pay close attention to the words "a girlfriend". That means one girlfriend. If you're looking for an extended relationship (2-5 years or more), your best bet for getting that with the least amount of grief and frustration is social circle. Many men who get social circle girlfriends tend to retain those girlfriends for a long time and often beyond the useful life of the relationship. A lot of the social circle girlfriend guys are beta males and beta males operate from a scarcity mindset. It's common to see a 10 year+ relationship from social circle which does lead to a marriage proposal.

For men with social circles, the problem with the social circle method eventually becomes sustainability as social circles get pissed at men who continually exchange girlfriends, even if the relationships are semi-long (1-4 years). The behavior described in the last sentence is serial monogamy, so it is accurate to say that social circles get pissed off at serial monogamists. It is important to remember that social circles generally have a blue pill viewpoint on romantic relationships. A man might be able to pull 2 LTRs from a social circle without marrying one. After 2 instances, he will have typically bled the social circle dry. Then again, a lot of the beta males who use social circle game aren't interested in serial monogamy and believe in the idea of a sustainable, happier marriage.

The last 2 paragraphs are likely more advanced than where you are at right now, though you have had issues with retaining women you've had sex with in the past.

 

[BeExcellent]

Everyone here has tried to help you. I concur with @SW15 and his synopsis. Quit comparing yourself to others, quit complaining.

Plenty of men on the spectrum get married and have relationships.

You are big on excuses and refuse to act. That responsibility lies with you.

My husband does not parade around his nuerodiverse nature. He makes great effort to improve himself, be successful, articulate and attractive. You need to act as the forum has advised you repeatedly.

 

[GoodMan32]

The muscles and the helpful mental therapy are the most important parts of that description. Then the motorcycle. The other stuff isn't as important.

Rollo Tomassi has said the following quote many times "Muscles, money, and game"

Get big muscles throughout your body. Muscles and mental health therapy are what you need.

Planet Fitness has $15 a month memberships. Though that's a subpar gym, you could make progress there. 24 Hour Fitness and LA Fitness are better chain gyms and their costs are reasonable.



She wasn't necessarily wrong but she also probably didn't help you with getting the tools to do it.

It is true that social circle is great for getting a girlfriend for the men with fortunate enough situations in life to have them. Pay close attention to the words "a girlfriend". That means one girlfriend. If you're looking for an extended relationship (2-5 years or more), your best bet for getting that with the least amount of grief and frustration is social circle. Many men who get social circle girlfriends tend to retain those girlfriends for a long time and often beyond the useful life of the relationship. A lot of the social circle girlfriend guys are beta males and beta males operate from a scarcity mindset. It's common to see a 10 year+ relationship from social circle which does lead to a marriage proposal.

For men with social circles, the problem with the social circle method eventually becomes sustainability as social circles get pissed at men who continually exchange girlfriends, even if the relationships are semi-long (1-4 years). The behavior described in the last sentence is serial monogamy, so it is accurate to say that social circles get pissed off at serial monogamists. It is important to remember that social circles generally have a blue pill viewpoint on romantic relationships. A man might be able to pull 2 LTRs from a social circle without marrying one. After 2 instances, he will have typically bled the social circle dry. Then again, a lot of the beta males who use social circle game aren't interested in serial monogamy and believe in the idea of a sustainable, happier marriage.

The last 2 paragraphs are likely more advanced than where you are at right now, though you have had issues with retaining women you've had sex with in the past.

There's a free gym in my condo building (Granted, it's smaller than Planet Fitness. But there's more than enough equipment). I've gone through phases where I've used my condo building's gym.

As for the social circle thing, if a social circle didn't help me get laid (or even get a girlfriend...or even a single date for that matter) in college, I'm not so sure how a social circle could help me 15 years later.

My educated guess tells me getting a woman through a college social circle is a lot easier than getting a woman through a 30-something social circle. In other words, even on easy mode, the social circle strategy failed for me.

You're right I've had a hard time retaining past sex partners (On that note, it dawned on me why my seduction skills are extremely lacking, despite the fact I've managed to get 9 non-escort sex partners: A majority of these partners came from Craigslist. When meeting a woman on Craigslist, it's implied there will be sex. Seducing my way to the bedroom with a woman I met organically, with whom there's no implication of guaranteed sex, is one thing I have hardly any experience at)

I don't want marriage. As for how long I want a relationship to last, I haven't given much thought to an exact number. All I know is I want more continuous sex with the same woman than I've been able to get in the past.

 

[Gamisch]

Mods you can close this thread. Everything that's necessary is said, and now we're just running in circles.

Just joking. Let's run a few more circles!

 

[zekko]

She talked about my hair an awful lot. She asked if I dyed my hair, she said my hair looks good, she said she likes my haircut, she said my hair looks good a 2nd time.

Do you dye your hair?

There is self-esteem damage that comes with taking rejections. At a certain point, if a man takes enough rejections without any successes, then he's going to dislike asking women to go on dates. My sense is that your self-esteem is in the toilet from too many rejections with little to no success.

Thanks for saying that. I could never really embrace the PUA idea that you should value rejections and not let them bother you. I mean I get the idea behind it, and in some aspects it makes sense, but I never got to the point where I enjoyed rejections. It's good that you make the attempt, but I've never liked being rejected, whatever the reason.

 

[SW15]

I don't want marriage. As for how long I want a relationship to last, I haven't given much thought to an exact number. All I know is I want more continuous sex with the same woman than I've been able to get in the past.

The Only 9 Options for Men as They Age - Alpha Male 2.0

-By Caleb Jones As I’ve discussed before, most men, even Alpha Males, have no intention on being players for the rest of their lives. At some point, even the horniest players will want to “settle down” in some form or fashion. Today I’m going to...

alphamale20.com

You would be closest to wanting Option 6 from that article.

6. Be a serial monogamist forever

This option means that you have a constant stream of short-term (three years or less) monogamous relationships, one after the next, for the rest of your life, even well into your old age.

Like with option 2 (serial monogamy marriage), this option is for Alpha Males who secretly like highs and lows, though they’re not as addicted to problems like those option-2 guys. This option is particularly suitable for men who are more controlling or who don’t have high sex drives.

While I’m against monogamy, I do admit this is a valid option for certain personality types. You’re monogamous, which means you’ve handed your balls over to a woman, and that means there’s a permanent ceiling on your freedom and happiness once the NRE phase is over. You’re also getting dumped a lot which won’t be fun for you. However, at least you’re not putting yourself at risk of divorce and other massive catastrophes.

There's a free gym in my condo building (Granted, it's smaller than Planet Fitness. But there's more than enough equipment). I've gone through phases where I've used my condo building's gym.

You are well set up from a gym perspective. In theory, you could supplement at times with classes at a standalone facility if you thought you could meet women at fitness classes. You won't do this. I don't blame you for not doing this because fitness classes are a difficult place to do pickup/approaching, even for neurotypicals whose lives are in far better order than yours.

As for the social circle thing, if a social circle didn't help me get laid (or even get a girlfriend...or even a single date for that matter) in college, I'm not so sure how a social circle could help me 15 years later.

My educated guess tells me getting a woman through a college social circle is a lot easier than getting a woman through a 30-something social circle. In other words, even on easy mode, the social circle strategy failed for me.

I'm going to write a response to this quote as if I were advising a 33 year old neurotypical about social circles as a mid-30s guy.

In general, social circles work better for younger men. Social circles formed through schooling (high school or college), service sector work, or early post college, 20 something era white collar work are the best social circles. These are social circles that are comprised of mainly people under 30 who are either unattached or unmarried childless people in non-marital relationships. These are the types of social circles where getting introductions to other eligible unattached people is going to be the easiest.

The typical 32-36 year old male won't be able to get into a good social circle if he's starting from scratch, possibly due to a relocation.

The typical 32-36 year old male who hasn't moved recently is in a social circle with other 30 somethings who are in very committed LTRs or are already married. In a lot of cases, these people in his social circle are now raising infants/toddlers. These aren't people who are usually capable of introducing him to a lot of unattached people. These people in his social circle don't typically know unattached people or have very weak relationships with unattached people.

It's not impossible for a 30 something male to get a social circle introduction, but it is improbable and far more difficult. In the less common cases when a 30 something male gets a social circle introduction, it happens because he's been in the same geographical area for a very long time (often all the way back to childhood) and has very deep social ties in that area.

Most 30 something and even early 40 something men won't be able to build a social circle from scratch at their ages. They are going to be reliant upon meeting strangers from approaching strangers in real life, swipe apps, or sending DMs on social media platforms.

Swipe apps are filled with 30 something singles with weaker social circles.

 

[Gamisch]

There is self-esteem damage that comes with taking rejections. At a certain point, if a man takes enough rejections without any successes, then he's going to dislike asking women to go on dates. My sense is that your self-esteem is in the toilet from too many rejections with little to no success.

Unfortunately most men don't even need rejections to get to that point. Just having no real contact with women will do this as well. Or too much contact ( like living together) wil also make a man dislike women.

Do you dye your hair?



Thanks for saying that. I could never really embrace the PUA idea that you should value rejections and not let them bother you. I mean I get the idea behind it, and in some aspects it makes sense, but I never got to the point where I enjoyed rejections. It's good that you make the attempt, but I've never liked being rejected, whatever the reason.

Its still true though..rejections shouldn't faze you. Its a game and rejections are the punches we men gotta endure. If you want to learn boxing you will get hit.

I also think that there can be a turning point where rejections become fun( like getting hit in boxing becomes "fun") Why? Because we as men cannot phantom how important it is for a woman to get approached/ complimented because it hardly ever happens to us and we are build different.

Once a man gets over the fear of rejection he becomes so much more powerful. You will need a state of mind where you are sincerely BAFFLED that a woman rejects you aka extreme confidence , instead of the "okidoki yeah I understand that you reject me because I'm not sure if I would be able to handle you anyway, sorry mam' !!". F THAT. Gotta ride that high horse and be 10000% sure you'll take her on the adventure of a lifetime.

@GoodMan32 qouted you twice and still no reaction bro...you avoid my questions?

 

[SW15]

There is self-esteem damage that comes with taking rejections. At a certain point, if a man takes enough rejections without any successes, then he's going to dislike asking women to go on dates. My sense is that your self-esteem is in the toilet from too many rejections with little to no success.

Thanks for saying that. I could never really embrace the PUA idea that you should value rejections and not let them bother you. I mean I get the idea behind it, and in some aspects it makes sense, but I never got to the point where I enjoyed rejections. It's good that you make the attempt, but I've never liked being rejected, whatever the reason.

I could never embrace that idea either. Rejections have always bothered me to some degree. I have never enjoyed any of my rejections for whatever reason. I am motivated by the successes.

I don't fear rejections and I understand it's a part of the seduction lifestyle. However, it isn't a fun part of the lifestyle.

 

[Gamisch]

I could never embrace that idea either. Rejections have always bothered me to some degree. I have never enjoyed any of my rejections for whatever reason. I am motivated by the successes.

I don't fear rejections and I understand it's a part of the seduction lifestyle. However, it isn't a fun part of the lifestyle.

Okay.

But now you reach a point where rejections becomes a success!! Read that twice..

Imagine Goodman telling us he went out this weekend, danced and talked to every woman while he got no numbers. That would be a HUGE step.forward and it would be a matter of time before he hit the jackpot.

We need a turning point by now. You should be proud of yourself if you get rejected every now and then because you're taking control of your life again.

OLD really did a number on us men. It's a path with a dead end yet most men refuse to return and take that other ,longer route.

 

[SW15]

Imagine Goodman telling us he went out this weekend, danced and talked to every woman while he got no numbers. That would be a HUGE step.forward and it would be a matter of time before he hit the jackpot.

I don't see that happening. He said that it is a common trait for autism spectrum people to dislike social events like private residence parties and typical nightlife venues.

He would have a better chance of actually bothering to do non-bar approaching but it would take him a long time to actually see results from it. Issues on personality, money, and looks all would impact his daygame results at the moment. The personality issues would be the most damaging, as he has been told by multiple posters to fix his mindset first.

OLD really did a number on us men. It's a path with a dead end yet most men refuse to return and take that other ,longer route.

I agree with this. The statement deserves deep examination and going back a few decades in time.

Let's go back to the era after the Sexual Revolution but before dating websites got de-stigmatized. This is roughly 1970-2005.

In the 1970s to mid-2000s, unattached men had to get ready and go outside to venues to meet new women. This was involved and most men did this type of effort for bars. Non-bar approaching has always been more of a niche type activity. Men would go to bars in that era, often get somewhat intoxicated, and come home from the bars empty handed and upset about not making progress with meeting women. It's an upsetting feeling.

The men who came of age after this era decided that they wanted little to do with that or they didn't want to experience that at all. They decided it was easier to sit at home, look unpresentable, and meet women from behind an electronic screen.

While both bars and dating websites/dating apps are very difficult, the website/app era gave women the abundance of penis options that they never had during the bar era. For women, online dating has been like being in multiple bars (10+) at the same time 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In the past, women were only limited to one bar at a time for 2-3 hours and 1-2 times per week. Women are going to have more interactions with more men as a result of being on the internet.

While there's an appeal to men in sitting at home and starting interactions with women in a t-shirt and sweatpants, it's not something that will work for most men unless they are 6'0'+ and fit/muscular.

There's even research going back to 2015 on this. Thank you to @Hamurabimbi for posting this link again recently.

Tinder Experiments II: Guys, unless you are really hot you are probably better off not wasting your…

by Worst-Online-Dater

medium.com

 

[GoodMan32]

Everyone here has tried to help you. I concur with @SW15 and his synopsis. Quit comparing yourself to others, quit complaining.

Plenty of men on the spectrum get married and have relationships.

You are big on excuses and refuse to act. That responsibility lies with you.

My husband does not parade around his nuerodiverse nature. He makes great effort to improve himself, be successful, articulate and attractive. You need to act as the forum has advised you repeatedly.

You've made it sound like your husband has Chad-tier looks. Even without improvements, he'd get lots of attention from the ladies. I can't help the fact I don't have Chad-tier looks (although I remain adamant I'm at least above average)

While the estimates vary, the general consensus is being an autist drastically impacts your luck in the relationship department (especially for male autists)

Here's a scientific study of autists where only 16% of male autists were in a relationship (compared to 46% of female autists): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5789215



Psych Central reports that 50% of autists are in a relationship (compared to 70% of neurotypicals). And I guarantee the 50% would plummet if they only counted male autists. Another thing that stood out (which I can relate to) is the part where they mention that even when an autist gets into a relationship, the relationship tends to be short-lived:

https://psychcentral.com/autism/autism-and-relationships#4

 

[Gamisch]

I don't see that happening. He said that it is a common trait for autism spectrum people to dislike social events like private residence parties and typical nightlife venues.

He would have a better chance of actually bothering to do non-bar approaching but it would take him a long time to actually see results from it. Issues on personality, money, and looks all would impact his daygame results at the moment. The personality issues would be the most damaging, as he has been told by multiple posters to fix his mindset first.



I agree with this. The statement deserves deep examination and going back a few decades in time.

Let's go back to the era after the Sexual Revolution but before dating websites got de-stigmatized. This is roughly 1970-2005.

In the 1970s to mid-2000s, unattached men had to get ready and go outside to venues to meet new women. This was involved and most men did this type of effort for bars. Non-bar approaching has always been more of a niche type activity. Men would go to bars in that era, often get somewhat intoxicated, and come home from the bars empty handed and upset about not making progress with meeting women. It's an upsetting feeling.

The men who came of age after this era decided that they wanted little to do with that or they didn't want to experience that at all. They decided it was easier to sit at home, look unpresentable, and meet women from behind an electronic screen.

While both bars and dating websites/dating apps are very difficult, the website/app era gave women the abundance of penis options that they never had during the bar era. For women, online dating has been like being in multiple bars (10+) at the same time 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In the past, women were only limited to one bar at a time for 2-3 hours and 1-2 times per week. Women are going to have more interactions with more men as a result of being on the internet.

While there's an appeal to men in sitting at home and starting interactions with women in a t-shirt and sweatpants, it's not something that will work for most men unless they are 6'0'+ and fit/muscular.

There's even research going back to 2015 on this. Thank you to @Hamurabimbi for posting this link again recently.

Tinder Experiments II: Guys, unless you are really hot you are probably better off not wasting your…

by Worst-Online-Dater

medium.com

If I gotta be dead honest , it creates a "rich getting richer " type of dynamic .

Eventually the bar/ OLD/ festival will be full of men who DO think they got what it takes, while the rest of men indeed stays home without even trying to make themselves presentable.

And unfortunately...nobody cares!

The bar can have 200 people . If there 130 men and 70 women we got a great party. No one cares about the man who does NOT wanna participate. They weed themselves out. A festival wil have the same dynamic but only ten times bigger, with even less rules and more play.

Something as simple as the gym has the same dynamic. The men who DO care about their body will be there, thus a woman will go there wearing a " cute " outfit because it's filled to the brim with men that prepare themselves for success.

The men who don't wanna take risks / effort won't be missed at all. In other times they would've died in a silly war or doing a dangerous job. Now they get to live longer ,but they won't ever reproduce now and they wouldn't reproduce in any other era of humanity.

That "experiment " proofs my point; women (sub) consciously know that the truly confident men will stay on OLD and thus it becomes a form of POSSIBLE social proof. Imagine a man talking about OLD as women do: saying its just a hook up app for quick lays . That alone indicates that that man has exactly that experience there, whereas other men will say its like beating a dead horse and its pointless to use OLD.

@GoodMan32...still waiting....