Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 Resonates - lol, it's great the way you describe this and I so agree. I also know others who think the same. I don't often post here or even always follow the postings - just have seen too much unintentional ND-bashing that does nothing to help me appreciate my own wonderfully unique family; I have no idea how some of you do stay married, lol. On attraction and frankly, I hear and understand some of the hypotheses on the role of ND within evolution, and as we draw through the " information age " into who knows where it could take us, maybe " attraction " is a matter of survival. On a personal level, I remember being a teenager and having a totally different idea of attractive. As a female I had role model expectations of course, keeping my soft thick hair long (because I didn't like haircuts, lol) and by expectation learned " socialization. " As I get older I could care less about " socialization " and regret the years lost on what could have been time in further developing real skills. Like you say for the NT , ignore intellectual intimacy at your peril, that's right, because minds like ours can and will find our fill. We can't help it and we quite naturally seek it out. I find it to be a complete lack of empathy to expect a human being to stop doing something other than finding their happiness. We say " I love you, " so get real and really turn on those ears when we want to talk about something meaningful - lol! After all, love is real and shown by actions much more than words anyways - are we not doing a great job at moving things along toward good daily living? Consider, just for a moment, natural evolutionary directions. Be happy we're taking " a break " from thinking, and choosing you to discuss it with, it's love! > > Hi Sandy, > > Yes, I like that phrase " intellectual intimacy " you've coined, and > it's certainly something I value myself. I hadn't previously thought > of it as being an Aspie issue in itself, but now we start to talk > about it, I'm coming to think perhaps it is. > > Just how significant intellectual stimulation from a partner is to an > Aspie might depend on how much of it the Aspie gets from elsewhere. Due > to my own isolated situation, I know I'm starved of it, so I very much > crave a chance to have a nice discussion with anyone on my own level. If > I can see a possibility of a chance arising, I might deliberately say > something controversial or start asking questions to see if I can get a > reaction and a discussion going! > > So I think perhaps we're identifying quite an important angle to Aspie > relationships here. Intellectual discourse is something we feed on, > and if we're starved of it, we feel unfulfilled and we're not happy bunnies. > > But now here's the big question: What constitutes " intellectual " ? You > and I might have very different interests and nothing " intellectual " in > common. Let's say for example you are interested in sculpture, and > I'm interested in astronomy. Both could be said to be intellectual > subjects but I've no interest in sculpture and you've no interest in > astronomy. Too bad! We're not on the same wavelength so we've > nothing really interesting and absorbing to talk about. Sorry babe, no > chemistry.... nothing doing tonight! Am a describing elements of a > scenario that resonate with anyone else here? > > Of course there are lots of mundane things that partners need to talk > about concerning their everyday living. Household matters, shopping, > kids, what's on TV tonight, paying bills etc. etc. but none of these > are what I'd describe as intellectual. Intellectual topics are > somehow one step higher than this mundane stuff, and they are what give > life its sense of direction and purpose. Ignore them at your peril! > > I have to say that for myself, since I do so lack intellectual intimacy > at home, if I were to find real intellectual intimacy with a female > neighbour, I can easily imagine it leading to chemistry and other > things. OTOH it can't be easy, especially for an Aspie, to find a > member of the opposite sex with truly common intellectual interests. > Males and females usually tend to go down different intellectual roads. > > But don't forget affection and chemistry follow *after* you've achieved > a meeting of minds, so it's unrealistic to expect affection to just > appear spontaneously. > > > > --- Re: NT and AS (RE-POSTED) > > > My husband and I have always had the most " chemistry " when I have > entered his world for a while. He is into tractors and farming. When I > go out to his shop and watch him work, even if I am talking about > various things, that seems to help our relationship. It also seems to be > a good way for me to tell him stuff because I don't expect his full > attention and he can come in and out of the " conversation. " He also > doesn't have to look at me. When I help him a lot with his farming > stuff, that also contributes to good feelings from him toward me. > > I think what happens is I drift away from his interests. He doesn't join > mine except to occasionally tell me how to do them. > > So what you said about thinking along the same line seems to fit with my > experience. I know he enjoys intellectual intimacy more than anything > else and loves to debate issues. I can do that for a while, but after > working all day, it gets tiresome for me. He loves to do that with our > female neighbor and that has been a sore point for me at times. Yet I > realize that is what's going on. I have tried to set some " rules " as to > what I am comfortable with in terms of his engagement with her. She has > a farm and has him do a lot of the work (for which she pays him). She > also is widely read in some of the same areas as he. However, he assures > me that he is not interested in her in other ways and I haven't seen any > evidence to the contrary. I am also friends with her and we have a good > time together. > > So it's a challenge. We do find things to discuss but not as much as he > would like. And he is not affectionate with me for 99% of the time. > Sandy > > *SNIP* > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 Hey aspires,I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love a little to much, course we need to know the science of it, but damn... What happened to just having fun with each other?And what does ND stand for?regards,C. To: aspires-relationships Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 4:42 PMSubject: Re: Intellectual intimacy Resonates - lol, it's great the way you describe this and I so agree. I also know others who think the same. I don't often post here or even always follow the postings - just have seen too much unintentional ND-bashing that does nothing to help me appreciate my own wonderfully unique family; I have no idea how some of you do stay married, lol. On attraction and frankly, I hear and understand some of the hypotheses on the role of ND within evolution, and as we draw through the "information age" into who knows where it could take us, maybe "attraction" is a matter of survival. On a personal level, I remember being a teenager and having a totally different idea of attractive. As a female I had role model expectations of course, keeping my soft thick hair long (because I didn't like haircuts, lol) and by expectation learned "socialization." As I get older I could care less about "socialization" and regret the years lost on what could have been time in further developing real skills. Like you say for the NT , ignore intellectual intimacy at your peril, that's right, because minds like ours can and will find our fill. We can't help it and we quite naturally seek it out. I find it to be a complete lack of empathy to expect a human being to stop doing something other than finding their happiness. We say "I love you," so get real and really turn on those ears when we want to talk about something meaningful - lol! After all, love is real and shown by actions much more than words anyways - are we not doing a great job at moving things along toward good daily living? Consider, just for a moment, natural evolutionary directions. Be happy we're taking "a break" from thinking, and choosing you to discuss it with, it's love! > > Hi Sandy, > > Yes, I like that phrase "intellectual intimacy" you've coined, and > it's certainly something I value myself. I hadn't previously thought > of it as being an Aspie issue in itself, but now we start to talk > about it, I'm coming to think perhaps it is. > > Just how significant intellectual stimulation from a partner is to an > Aspie might depend on how much of it the Aspie gets from elsewhere. Due > to my own isolated situation, I know I'm starved of it, so I very much > crave a chance to have a nice discussion with anyone on my own level. If > I can see a possibility of a chance arising, I might deliberately say > something controversial or start asking questions to see if I can get a > reaction and a discussion going! > > So I think perhaps we're identifying quite an important angle to Aspie > relationships here. Intellectual discourse is something we feed on, > and if we're starved of it, we feel unfulfilled and we're not happy bunnies. > > But now here's the big question: What constitutes "intellectual"? You > and I might have very different interests and nothing "intellectual" in > common. Let's say for example you are interested in sculpture, and > I'm interested in astronomy. Both could be said to be intellectual > subjects but I've no interest in sculpture and you've no interest in > astronomy. Too bad! We're not on the same wavelength so we've > nothing really interesting and absorbing to talk about. Sorry babe, no > chemistry.... nothing doing tonight! Am a describing elements of a > scenario that resonate with anyone else here? > > Of course there are lots of mundane things that partners need to talk > about concerning their everyday living. Household matters, shopping, > kids, what's on TV tonight, paying bills etc. etc. but none of these > are what I'd describe as intellectual. Intellectual topics are > somehow one step higher than this mundane stuff, and they are what give > life its sense of direction and purpose. Ignore them at your peril! > > I have to say that for myself, since I do so lack intellectual intimacy > at home, if I were to find real intellectual intimacy with a female > neighbour, I can easily imagine it leading to chemistry and other > things. OTOH it can't be easy, especially for an Aspie, to find a > member of the opposite sex with truly common intellectual interests. > Males and females usually tend to go down different intellectual roads. > > But don't forget affection and chemistry follow *after* you've achieved > a meeting of minds, so it's unrealistic to expect affection to just > appear spontaneously. > > > > --- Re: NT and AS (RE-POSTED) > > > My husband and I have always had the most "chemistry" when I have > entered his world for a while. He is into tractors and farming. When I > go out to his shop and watch him work, even if I am talking about > various things, that seems to help our relationship. It also seems to be > a good way for me to tell him stuff because I don't expect his full > attention and he can come in and out of the "conversation." He also > doesn't have to look at me. When I help him a lot with his farming > stuff, that also contributes to good feelings from him toward me. > > I think what happens is I drift away from his interests. He doesn't join > mine except to occasionally tell me how to do them. > > So what you said about thinking along the same line seems to fit with my > experience. I know he enjoys intellectual intimacy more than anything > else and loves to debate issues. I can do that for a while, but after > working all day, it gets tiresome for me. He loves to do that with our > female neighbor and that has been a sore point for me at times. Yet I > realize that is what's going on. I have tried to set some "rules" as to > what I am comfortable with in terms of his engagement with her. She has > a farm and has him do a lot of the work (for which she pays him). She > also is widely read in some of the same areas as he. However, he assures > me that he is not interested in her in other ways and I haven't seen any > evidence to the contrary. I am also friends with her and we have a good > time together. > > So it's a challenge. We do find things to discuss but not as much as he > would like. And he is not affectionate with me for 99% of the time. > Sandy > > *SNIP* > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 at 08:28:52 -0700 (PDT), Van dijk wrote: > ....What happened to just having fun with each other? fun with each other ???? What's that? Not familiar! Please explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 I can say from my experience that intellectual intimacy seems to be THE most important thing for my AS husband. He and I met in college and were both English majors who liked the same music, films, and books, and we both really enjoyed discussing those things. He has told me before that he can't imagine being with anyone else because no one else would be smart enough to have good discussions with him. So for him, I'd say that means it's pretty important! When I think of the friendships he's formed with guys he meets, they really only click if there's an intellectual interest they share. I sometimes joke that he talks more with his guy friends than I talk with my girlfriends -- but it's true! In terms of our marriage, one thing I've realized is SO important to him is that even if I'm not knowledgeable about a topic he wants to discuss, I need to at least ask engaging questions. Intellectual intimacy really seems to be the glue that keeps us together. That and our adorable son, of course! > > Hi Sandy, > > Yes, I like that phrase " intellectual intimacy " you've coined, and > it's certainly something I value myself. I hadn't previously thought > of it as being an Aspie issue in itself, but now we start to talk > about it, I'm coming to think perhaps it is. > > Just how significant intellectual stimulation from a partner is to an > Aspie might depend on how much of it the Aspie gets from elsewhere. Due > to my own isolated situation, I know I'm starved of it, so I very much > crave a chance to have a nice discussion with anyone on my own level. If > I can see a possibility of a chance arising, I might deliberately say > something controversial or start asking questions to see if I can get a > reaction and a discussion going! > > So I think perhaps we're identifying quite an important angle to Aspie > relationships here. Intellectual discourse is something we feed on, > and if we're starved of it, we feel unfulfilled and we're not happy bunnies. > > But now here's the big question: What constitutes " intellectual " ? You > and I might have very different interests and nothing " intellectual " in > common. Let's say for example you are interested in sculpture, and > I'm interested in astronomy. Both could be said to be intellectual > subjects but I've no interest in sculpture and you've no interest in > astronomy. Too bad! We're not on the same wavelength so we've > nothing really interesting and absorbing to talk about. Sorry babe, no > chemistry.... nothing doing tonight! Am a describing elements of a > scenario that resonate with anyone else here? > > Of course there are lots of mundane things that partners need to talk > about concerning their everyday living. Household matters, shopping, > kids, what's on TV tonight, paying bills etc. etc. but none of these > are what I'd describe as intellectual. Intellectual topics are > somehow one step higher than this mundane stuff, and they are what give > life its sense of direction and purpose. Ignore them at your peril! > > I have to say that for myself, since I do so lack intellectual intimacy > at home, if I were to find real intellectual intimacy with a female > neighbour, I can easily imagine it leading to chemistry and other > things. OTOH it can't be easy, especially for an Aspie, to find a > member of the opposite sex with truly common intellectual interests. > Males and females usually tend to go down different intellectual roads. > > But don't forget affection and chemistry follow *after* you've achieved > a meeting of minds, so it's unrealistic to expect affection to just > appear spontaneously. > > > > --- Re: NT and AS (RE-POSTED) > > > My husband and I have always had the most " chemistry " when I have > entered his world for a while. He is into tractors and farming. When I > go out to his shop and watch him work, even if I am talking about > various things, that seems to help our relationship. It also seems to be > a good way for me to tell him stuff because I don't expect his full > attention and he can come in and out of the " conversation. " He also > doesn't have to look at me. When I help him a lot with his farming > stuff, that also contributes to good feelings from him toward me. > > I think what happens is I drift away from his interests. He doesn't join > mine except to occasionally tell me how to do them. > > So what you said about thinking along the same line seems to fit with my > experience. I know he enjoys intellectual intimacy more than anything > else and loves to debate issues. I can do that for a while, but after > working all day, it gets tiresome for me. He loves to do that with our > female neighbor and that has been a sore point for me at times. Yet I > realize that is what's going on. I have tried to set some " rules " as to > what I am comfortable with in terms of his engagement with her. She has > a farm and has him do a lot of the work (for which she pays him). She > also is widely read in some of the same areas as he. However, he assures > me that he is not interested in her in other ways and I haven't seen any > evidence to the contrary. I am also friends with her and we have a good > time together. > > So it's a challenge. We do find things to discuss but not as much as he > would like. And he is not affectionate with me for 99% of the time. > Sandy > > *SNIP* > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 I think what's being shared is that intellectual discussion with someone on our level or at least willing to be interested and ask intelligent questions IS FUN to us. Very much "just having fun". Jennie AS Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®Sender: aspires-relationships Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:28:52 -0700 (PDT)To: aspires-relationships <aspires-relationships >ReplyTo: aspires-relationships Subject: Re: Re: Intellectual intimacy Hey aspires,I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love a little to much, course we need to know the science of it, but damn... What happened to just having fun with each other?And what does ND stand for?regards,C. To: aspires-relationships Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 4:42 PMSubject: Re: Intellectual intimacy Resonates - lol, it's great the way you describe this and I so agree. I also know others who think the same. I don't often post here or even always follow the postings - just have seen too much unintentional ND-bashing that does nothing to help me appreciate my own wonderfully unique family; I have no idea how some of you do stay married, lol.On attraction and frankly, I hear and understand some of the hypotheses on the role of ND within evolution, and as we draw through the "information age" into who knows where it could take us, maybe "attraction" is a matter of survival.On a personal level, I remember being a teenager and having a totally different idea of attractive. As a female I had role model expectations of course, keeping my soft thick hair long (because I didn't like haircuts, lol) and by expectation learned "socialization." As I get older I could care less about "socialization" and regret the years lost on what could have been time in further developing real skills.Like you say for the NT , ignore intellectual intimacy at your peril, that's right, because minds like ours can and will find our fill. We can't help it and we quite naturally seek it out. I find it to be a complete lack of empathy to expect a human being to stop doing something other than finding their happiness. We say "I love you," so get real and really turn on those ears when we want to talk about something meaningful - lol! After all, love is real and shown by actions much more than words anyways - are we not doing a great job at moving things along toward good daily living? Consider, just for a moment, natural evolutionary directions. Be happy we're taking "a break" from thinking, and choosing you to discuss it with, it's love! >> Hi Sandy,> > Yes, I like that phrase "intellectual intimacy" you've coined, and > it's certainly something I value myself. I hadn't previously thought > of it as being an Aspie issue in itself, but now we start to talk > about it, I'm coming to think perhaps it is.> > Just how significant intellectual stimulation from a partner is to an > Aspie might depend on how much of it the Aspie gets from elsewhere. Due > to my own isolated situation, I know I'm starved of it, so I very much > crave a chance to have a nice discussion with anyone on my own level. If > I can see a possibility of a chance arising, I might deliberately say > something controversial or start asking questions to see if I can get a > reaction and a discussion going!> > So I think perhaps we're identifying quite an important angle to Aspie > relationships here. Intellectual discourse is something we feed on, > and if we're starved of it, we feel unfulfilled and we're not happy bunnies.> > But now here's the big question: What constitutes "intellectual"? You > and I might have very different interests and nothing "intellectual" in > common. Let's say for example you are interested in sculpture, and > I'm interested in astronomy. Both could be said to be intellectual > subjects but I've no interest in sculpture and you've no interest in > astronomy. Too bad! We're not on the same wavelength so we've > nothing really interesting and absorbing to talk about. Sorry babe, no > chemistry.... nothing doing tonight! Am a describing elements of a > scenario that resonate with anyone else here?> > Of course there are lots of mundane things that partners need to talk > about concerning their everyday living. Household matters, shopping, > kids, what's on TV tonight, paying bills etc. etc. but none of these > are what I'd describe as intellectual. Intellectual topics are > somehow one step higher than this mundane stuff, and they are what give > life its sense of direction and purpose. Ignore them at your peril!> > I have to say that for myself, since I do so lack intellectual intimacy > at home, if I were to find real intellectual intimacy with a female > neighbour, I can easily imagine it leading to chemistry and other > things. OTOH it can't be easy, especially for an Aspie, to find a > member of the opposite sex with truly common intellectual interests. > Males and females usually tend to go down different intellectual roads.> > But don't forget affection and chemistry follow *after* you've achieved > a meeting of minds, so it's unrealistic to expect affection to just > appear spontaneously.> > > > --- Re: NT and AS (RE-POSTED)> > > My husband and I have always had the most "chemistry" when I have> entered his world for a while. He is into tractors and farming. When I> go out to his shop and watch him work, even if I am talking about> various things, that seems to help our relationship. It also seems to be > a good way for me to tell him stuff because I don't expect his full> attention and he can come in and out of the "conversation." He also> doesn't have to look at me. When I help him a lot with his farming> stuff, that also contributes to good feelings from him toward me.> > I think what happens is I drift away from his interests. He doesn't join > mine except to occasionally tell me how to do them.> > So what you said about thinking along the same line seems to fit with my > experience. I know he enjoys intellectual intimacy more than anything > else and loves to debate issues. I can do that for a while, but after > working all day, it gets tiresome for me. He loves to do that with our > female neighbor and that has been a sore point for me at times. Yet I > realize that is what's going on. I have tried to set some "rules" as to > what I am comfortable with in terms of his engagement with her. She has > a farm and has him do a lot of the work (for which she pays him). She > also is widely read in some of the same areas as he. However, he assures > me that he is not interested in her in other ways and I haven't seen any > evidence to the contrary. I am also friends with her and we have a good > time together.> > So it's a challenge. We do find things to discuss but not as much as he> would like. And he is not affectionate with me for 99% of the time.> Sandy> > *SNIP*> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love a little to much, Not intellectualizing it, Chris; this is important information. Listen and Learn, LOL. > course we need to know the science of it, but damn... What happened to just having fun with each other? Well if we all knew how to do this, we wouldn't be here right now, we'd be out doing it, hmmmmmmm? > > And what does ND stand for? ND = neurodiverse Happy Sunday everyone. - Helen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 > > > ....What happened to just having fun with each other? > > fun with each other ???? What's that? Not familiar! Please > explain. > > > , hahahahaha! - Helen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 What does neurodiverse stand for? Neurotypicals with some sort of disorder?regards,C. To: aspires-relationships Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 8:25 PMSubject: Re: Intellectual intimacy > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love a little to much, Not intellectualizing it, Chris; this is important information. Listen and Learn, LOL. > course we need to know the science of it, but damn... What happened to just having fun with each other? Well if we all knew how to do this, we wouldn't be here right now, we'd be out doing it, hmmmmmmm? > > And what does ND stand for? ND = neurodiverse Happy Sunday everyone. - Helen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 " Neurodiverse " encompasses a wider spectrum of diverse neurological conditions, not just those on the autism spectrum. It includes Aspergers and Autism and many others such Tourette's, ADD, OCD, bi-polar, etc. Folks are moving away from the term " disorder " as it applies to some of these conditions. Milder presentations of the condition may not be debilitating if it were not for other complications (environmental, psychological, etc.) and co-morbid conditions that may exist with it. Here is an (older) list of some of the more common acronyms associated with discussions about autism: http://www.autism-resources.com/autismfaq-glos.html Of course, it's not complete. They change over time; new acronyms are coined on various discussion groups. ND is one of those. Here on ASPIRES you will also see the term NS, for " non spectrum " meaning the person is not on the autism spectrum, and they may be NT or they may be ND. - Helen > > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love a little to much, > > Not intellectualizing it, Chris; this is important information. Listen and Learn, LOL. > > > course we need to know the science of it, but damn... What happened to just having fun with each other? > > Well if we all knew how to do this, we wouldn't be here right now, we'd be out doing it, hmmmmmmm? > > > > And what does ND stand for? > > ND = neurodiverse > > Happy Sunday everyone. > - Helen > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 You really said a lot there. I am sure that is applies equally to NT as it does to AS. I came across this article in the Huffington Post recently that speaks of the importance of being actively engaged with one another: Till Gray Do Us Part? How Marriage Can Survive Midlife Vivian Diller, Ph.D. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vivian-diller-phd/marriage-midlife_b_861403.html - Helen > > I can say from my experience that intellectual intimacy seems to be THE most important thing for my AS husband. He and I met in college and were both English majors who liked the same music, films, and books, and we both really enjoyed discussing those things. He has told me before that he can't imagine being with anyone else because no one else would be smart enough to have good discussions with him. So for him, I'd say that means it's pretty important! When I think of the friendships he's formed with guys he meets, they really only click if there's an intellectual interest they share. I sometimes joke that he talks more with his guy friends than I talk with my girlfriends -- but it's true! In terms of our marriage, one thing I've realized is SO important to him is that even if I'm not knowledgeable about a topic he wants to discuss, I need to at least ask engaging questions. Intellectual intimacy really seems to be the glue that keeps us together. That and our adorable son, of course! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Van dijk wrote: > Hey aspires, > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love > a little to much, course we need to know the science of it, but damn... > What happened to just having fun with each other? " A little to[sic] much " ? Just who decides? maybe it's all in the way you worded this post. But I'm picking up a not-so-faint NT-centric whiff of " you folks sure are stuck in the dull and pedantic! " Did it ever occur to you that a strong intellectual attraction could be actually *fun* and the ultimate aphrodisiac for some people, both AS and NT alike? Each to his/her own kink. If it works, it works, and it's all good by me. My apologies if I misunderstood your intention. Best, ~CJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Wow. I certainly didn't mean it that, way, certainly not the whole ''dull and pedantic'' bit, and I'm not really fond for the ''not-faint NT centric-whiff'' of mine you refer too, though I certainly love the wording, but if I made a quip similar like that, I'll probably get crucified here on aspires.But I'll be honest, and I really dig the knowledge that's been passed over to all the members of aspires, I read it with joy myself, especially considering the prose of certain members- what with Ron being a published writer and all, but not only him, many more shown impressive prose, one which an aspiring writer like me hopes to get close to. But I'm currently in a phase of where I'm trying to lighten up, maybe even hopelessly dull my mind with a little less thinking because I've been suffering with OCD for while (PURE O, anyone who has any experience with this, knows that rumination is a highly dangerous activity) and though I loved to discuss and get into the core of things, i just feel that I could lose a little less intellectualism at the moment. Sometimes it feels that nobody has any answers, you look around and the smartest people are unhappy in relationships while others suffer from small minds but have big hearts to back them up. I'm a little tired of it and I just threw it in there without really thinking about it- i'm not even sure why I even said it actually, whatever the reasons, it was not at all meant to undermine the great minds at work here. All of the posts on Aspires have been insightful in their own way and I hope that I will one day come close to granting the members here as well as the world with the knowledge that has been shared here. Intellectual intimacy is certainly important, and for every mind who divulge in such a pleasure, be it NT or AS (though intellectual discussions are highly subjective, simple minds may divulge in what they think is highly intellectual while mind with more experience in witty play might disagree with that), to ad anything into this discussion, however pointless, I have to say that intellectual intimacy is highly important and I am not sure if I get this right, but does the ''intellectual intimacy'' refer to one's passions? Every aspie has a different fondness for a certain subject than others, some aspies are really into baseball, others on star trek, others on Astronomy. Many might say that the first two aren't based on intellectualism, but they are passions non the less. An NT might be really into science or TV-shows (I am currently awaiting with bated breath on the fourth season premier of ''breaking bad'', just thought I'd mention that for any other fans here) and if you are lucky, you will find someone with the same interest, otherwise there are more aspects in a relationship in which the two can share and be happy with- i'm sure that even the same interest has zero to do with finalizing a successful relationship because a successful relationship has multiple components. There are always friends to divulge your passions too if they happen to love the same. I have an extreme love for film, and I rarely met anyone who loves it on the same caliber, while my AS spouse isn't a big movie buff, but I don't mind much. Maybe for an AS it might be more important, but romantic relationships are great in that both interest can be shared and explored. I don't know, sometimes I feel that love is being intellectualized to much, I love the post of where someone said that romantic relationships is basically about being two buddies in this great filthy world we share. I like that, when I was younger (let's say 17) I couldn't understand the problem with relationships, I thought to myself ''Isn't it just being friends with the added bonus of getting to fuck each other?'' now I realize of course that it's more complicated than that, but I wish we could get close to such simplicity. Course this is all talk from a twenty-two year old, but looking around me, even wise older men, haven't mastered the craft of a successful relationship. Relationship has a lot of emotions to them, and trust me, it's hard for us all, AS or NT alike. As long we find someone who's willing to care till the whole end of it, then there's always the shot for it to work.And with that, I say you all goodnight!regards,C. To: aspires-relationships From: shahmeran@...Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 15:30:49 -0700Subject: Re: Re: Intellectual intimacy Van dijk wrote: > Hey aspires, > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love > a little to much, course we need to know the science of it, but damn... > What happened to just having fun with each other? "A little to[sic] much"? Just who decides? maybe it's all in the way you worded this post. But I'm picking up a not-so-faint NT-centric whiff of "you folks sure are stuck in the dull and pedantic!" Did it ever occur to you that a strong intellectual attraction could be actually *fun* and the ultimate aphrodisiac for some people, both AS and NT alike? Each to his/her own kink. If it works, it works, and it's all good by me. My apologies if I misunderstood your intention. Best, ~CJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Thanks CJ and Helen - your answer about ND was perfect! I don't want to leave you out since your question was amusing (although 's response was funny too!)... so maybe ND could also stand for 'superior' after time, hmm... let's just for a moment consider... There are studies out there showing how it's often a matter of being born with too many brain cells, as in, the brain cell regulation function does not work so then in pruning for cognitive organization, amazing things can happen. After all, " diverse " can be very interesting - it can also mean twice as capable physically with ambidexterity, twice the intellect with both sides of the brain plugging along at rapid speed, amazing vision, hearing, and creativity (or assembly of such from billions of memorized patterns of anything - art, music, math, science, etc.) -- and yes, even twice the fun, with so much going on -- sounds attractive to me.  Van dijk wrote: > Hey aspires, > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love > a little to much, course we need to know the science of it, but damn... > What happened to just having fun with each other? " A little to[sic] much " ? Just who decides? maybe it's all in the way you worded this post. But I'm picking up a not-so-faint NT-centric whiff of " you folks sure are stuck in the dull and pedantic! " Did it ever occur to you that a strong intellectual attraction could be actually *fun* and the ultimate aphrodisiac for some people, both AS and NT alike? Each to his/her own kink. If it works, it works, and it's all good by me. My apologies if I misunderstood your intention. Best, ~CJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 So nobody recieved my reply to CJ? Did It get lost somehow?regards,C. To: aspires-relationships Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 4:40 AMSubject: Re: Re: Intellectual intimacy Thanks CJ and Helen - your answer about ND was perfect! I don't want to leave you out since your question was amusing (although 's response was funny too!)... so maybe ND could also stand for 'superior' after time, hmm... let's just for a moment consider... There are studies out there showing how it's often a matter of being born with too many brain cells, as in, the brain cell regulation function does not work so then in pruning for cognitive organization, amazing things can happen. After all, "diverse" can be very interesting - it can also mean twice as capable physically with ambidexterity, twice the intellect with both sides of the brain plugging along at rapid speed, amazing vision, hearing, and creativity (or assembly of such from billions of memorized patterns of anything - art, music, math, science, etc.) -- and yes, even twice the fun, with so much going on -- sounds attractive to me. Van dijk wrote: > Hey aspires, > I'm a little boggled at how some people on aspires intellectualize love > a little to much, course we need to know the science of it, but damn... > What happened to just having fun with each other? "A little to[sic] much"? Just who decides? maybe it's all in the way you worded this post. But I'm picking up a not-so-faint NT-centric whiff of "you folks sure are stuck in the dull and pedantic!" Did it ever occur to you that a strong intellectual attraction could be actually *fun* and the ultimate aphrodisiac for some people, both AS and NT alike? Each to his/her own kink. If it works, it works, and it's all good by me. My apologies if I misunderstood your intention. Best, ~CJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 We've been having problems with disappearing posts lately. Try sending it again. - Helen > So nobody recieved my reply to CJ? Did It get lost somehow? > > regards, > > C. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 The problem is that I can't find it anymore, I wrote it here on hotmail and for some reason it doesn't save sent messages anymore!regards,C. To: aspires-relationships From: hfoisyca@...Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:47:46 +0000Subject: Re: Intellectual intimacy We've been having problems with disappearing posts lately. Try sending it again. - Helen > So nobody recieved my reply to CJ? Did It get lost somehow? > > regards, > > C. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Okay So i'm retyping my former reply, which has sadly gone lost somewhere in the vast space of the internet. Anyway, I know that I begin with sayings something like this,(this is a reply to CJ's comment on my ''not-so-faint-NT-centric whiff).First of all I don't all consider any member here on aspires as dull and pedantic, on the contrary I'm even slightly jealous reading reading the astounding prose, the vast vocabulary as well as it's very insightful content! This does not only pertain to our published writer Ron, but to others as well. As an aspiring writer, it's a joy reading all the e-mails all of the members of aspires. Though I'm not really fond with my so called ''not-so-faint-NT-centric-whiff'', I don't mean to sound rude but if I made such a quip concerning people with Asperger syndrome I'd get my ass kicked here. So What did I mean with ''just having fun''? Good question, to be honest I have a hard time figuring out why I even wrote it. I'm personally in a little phase right now in that I want a little less thinking in my life and maybe, or I guess, I could have reacted from this from this post. I suffer from OCD- pure O, and it's been a real bitch dealing with it, and anyone knowing anything about it, the pure O kind, knows that rumination is one of it's evil. It's basically mental rumination, an anxiety mind-fuck as I like to call it. So it was not at all meant to undermine any of the great minds at work here. So do I have anything to ad on the subject of intellectual intimacy? Well, and you may slap me silly me if I got this wrong, but does intellectual intimacy pertain an individual's passion? Not all aspies are fond of something that is considered intellectual, some are fond of astronomy yes or medical science and some are fond of Star trek and fucking baseball The last two will certainly not be on the top list of topics of intellectualism (and if i'm wrong about that, please correct me, I'm speaking for the majority here) yet they are passions none the less. (just like some NT's love psychiatry while others just love watching people beat the living fuck out of each in the ring)Aspies as I see, like many NT's i'm sure, but maybe not as severe, have obsessions on certain topics and certainly it would be very nice for them to share it with their significant other, but from my experience I also have seen that it's more or less a world they can control and maneuver, a safe little world while relationships don't really have obvious patterns to them (sure they can get predictable but you can never tell from the first affection till the time when the other becomes a little annoying suddenly, one never knows) and with me for instance, I love movies, TV-shows and some fiction writers where my aspie spouse has no interest in whatsoever, yet I don't mind. There are friends to which I can share some of my passions but I haven't found many people who love movies on the caliber like me, but I really don't mind that much, sure it would be nice for my spouse to like them to but I like that she has her own thing she can divulge in. I accept her shit, as she accepts my shit. A relationship is not merely about having the same interest because if that's true, I'm sure there a shitload of cases where relationships has failed even with couples having the SAME INTEREST. A relationship has multiple components to which as a young man like me, certain things that just have to click, and it's perseverance, and maybe even a leap of faith. Personally, when I love someone, and they love me, I love to be stuck with them and though I might very naive at the moment, I like to think I can take every challenge coming my way. I'm along for the ride if my spouse is to. Whatever's the secret is a to a successful romantic relationship, even wise men fail in them while simple minds have the heart to back it all up. I don't know, I seriously don't, sometimes I wish it was as simple as I thought it would be when I was younger, where once upon a time I said: ''Why can't relationships be about two friends, who also having the added bonus of fucking?'' Gee, wouldn't it be swell if relationships were that simple. So I think my e-mail yesterday was a bit more thought-out, but anyway here you all go.Regards,C. To: aspires-relationships Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 11:02 AMSubject: RE: Re: Intellectual intimacy The problem is that I can't find it anymore, I wrote it here on hotmail and for some reason it doesn't save sent messages anymore!regards,C. To: aspires-relationships From: hfoisyca@...Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:47:46 +0000Subject: Re: Intellectual intimacy We've been having problems with disappearing posts lately. Try sending it again. - Helen > So nobody recieved my reply to CJ? Did It get lost somehow? > > regards, > > C. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 This is so very sincere - let me joke for just a minute longer (in fun) and I'll be done. :)For your feelings with a pure O... Then by Helen's definition (which is out there co-inciding the public as well), that's also ND - and by my definition too then that does not exactly mean " neurotypicals with some sort of disorder " - lol, welcome to 'superior' - (which was also what that post was about, also intentionally toward your first definition of " ND " ) - Lol!! Thanks for sharing again,Jeanie  Okay So i'm retyping my former reply, which has sadly gone lost somewhere in the vast space of the internet. Anyway, I know that I begin with sayings something like this, (this is a reply to CJ's comment on my ''not-so-faint-NT-centric whiff). First of all I don't all consider any member here on aspires as dull and pedantic, on the contrary I'm even slightly jealous reading reading the astounding prose, the vast vocabulary as well as it's very insightful content! This does not only pertain to our published writer Ron, but to others as well. As an aspiring writer, it's a joy reading all the e-mails all of the members of aspires. Though I'm not really fond with my so called ''not-so-faint-NT-centric-whiff'', I don't mean to sound rude but if I made such a quip concerning people with Asperger syndrome I'd get my ass kicked here. So What did I mean with ''just having fun''? Good question, to be honest I have a hard time figuring out why I even wrote it. I'm personally in a little phase right now in that I want a little less thinking in my life and maybe, or I guess, I could have reacted from this from this post. I suffer from OCD- pure O, and it's been a real bitch dealing with it, and anyone knowing anything about it, the pure O kind, knows that rumination is one of it's evil. It's basically mental rumination, an anxiety mind-fuck as I like to call it. So it was not at all meant to undermine any of the great minds at work here. So do I have anything to ad on the subject of intellectual intimacy? Well, and you may slap me silly me if I got this wrong, but does intellectual intimacy pertain an individual's passion? Not all aspies are fond of something that is considered intellectual, some are fond of astronomy yes or medical science and some are fond of Star trek and fucking baseball The last two will certainly not be on the top list of topics of intellectualism (and if i'm wrong about that, please correct me, I'm speaking for the majority here) yet they are passions none the less. (just like some NT's love psychiatry while others just love watching people beat the living fuck out of each in the ring)Aspies as I see, like many NT's i'm sure, but maybe not as severe, have obsessions on certain topics and certainly it would be very nice for them to share it with their significant other, but from my experience I also have seen that it's more or less a world they can control and maneuver, a safe little world while relationships don't really have obvious patterns to them (sure they can get predictable but you can never tell from the first affection till the time when the other becomes a little annoying suddenly, one never knows) and with me for instance, I love movies, TV-shows and some fiction writers where my aspie spouse has no interest in whatsoever, yet I don't mind. There are friends to which I can share some of my passions but I haven't found many people who love movies on the caliber like me, but I really don't mind that much, sure it would be nice for my spouse to like them to but I like that she has her own thing she can divulge in. I accept her shit, as she accepts my shit. A relationship is not merely about having the same interest because if that's true, I'm sure there a shitload of cases where relationships has failed even with couples having the SAME INTEREST. A relationship has multiple components to which as a young man like me, certain things that just have to click, and it's perseverance, and maybe even a leap of faith. Personally, when I love someone, and they love me, I love to be stuck with them and though I might very naive at the moment, I like to think I can take every challenge coming my way. I'm along for the ride if my spouse is to. Whatever's the secret is a to a successful romantic relationship, even wise men fail in them while simple minds have the heart to back it all up. I don't know, I seriously don't, sometimes I wish it was as simple as I thought it would be when I was younger, where once upon a time I said: ''Why can't relationships be about two friends, who also having the added bonus of fucking?'' Gee, wouldn't it be swell if relationships were that simple. So I think my e-mail yesterday was a bit more thought-out, but anyway here you all go.Regards,C. To: aspires-relationships Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 11:02 AM Subject: RE: Re: Intellectual intimacy  The problem is that I can't find it anymore, I wrote it here on hotmail and for some reason it doesn't save sent messages anymore!regards,C. To: aspires-relationships From: hfoisyca@...Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:47:46 +0000Subject: Re: Intellectual intimacy  We've been having problems with disappearing posts lately. Try sending it again. - Helen > So nobody recieved my reply to CJ? Did It get lost somehow? > > regards, > > C. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Looks like hotmail froze up and buried your messages into the " deep abyss of ice " . So much for hotmail.. sounds more like coldmail or icemail. Sorry.. couldn't help but look at the humorous side of hotmail.. > > > > > So nobody recieved my reply to CJ? Did It get lost somehow? > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > C. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Van dijk wrote: << Though I'm not really fond with my so called ''not-so-faint-NT-centric-whiff'', I don't mean to sound rude but if I made such a quip concerning people with Asperger syndrome I'd get my ass kicked here. >> Not by me. I'm an equal opportunity ass kicker. I've watched plenty of Aspies do the equivalent, and I call 'em on it too. In fact, I actually got myself booted off a group for this very thing a few years back. Seems that I made a very tender Aspie cry.... That's precisely why I love this group. Thought-provoking adult conversations that help people grow (with folks taking personal responsibility and all!) are actually allowed and encouraged here. The definition of 'support' in this group encompasses a whole lot more than " Oh sweetie, those boring superficial NTs are just so awful and treat us so badly! " <snore> Best, ~CJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.