RE: herein tiresome final comment from Ron

[Guest guest]

Ron Hedgcock wrote:

<< Again, I apologize to all for ‘flogging a dead horse’. But I did

literally feel as though I had been somewhat misunderstood or I’d

inadequately explained what I meant. Now I can rest in peace. On the

other hand, maybe this explanation may give some information that is

useful. >>

I understood you (as you intended) the first time 'round, Ron. I just

didn't have anything to say on this complex topic, mostly because I

agree with you. You did such a good job at elaborating on the subject

that I couldn't think of anything more to add.

Best,

~CJ

[Guest guest]

Hi everyone,I apologize in advance here, but one of my Aspie obsessions is a niggle at the possibility of being misquoted or misunderstood.   And I have been just a little shocked to discover that in the responses and discussions about the Chemistry issue, some seem to have got the wrong Idea of what I was actually saying.   Might I just say too, thanks for some of the kind and appreciative words that have flown my way in the process.   So let me clarify, and pardon me if I have misread some of you. There are two very distinctive varieties of Chemistry in the human mating system.  One is essentially psychological, metaphorical and mental.   It is based presumably on aspects of the upbringing we’ve had, our inherent needs, the fantasies we’ve enjoyed and encouraged, and the kind of brain we’ve been blessed with and inherited.   It simply cannot be put into a test tube and analysed in a laboratory.   The word Chemistry in this regard is not literal.    Probably apart from individuals who are Psychopaths, there will be few normally sexed and everyday persons who are incapable of this sort of chemistry with another.   Most persons do feel some sort at least of affinity with certain other people, and (depending of course on the sexual orientation) will find individuals of more closeness than others, and want to share life and sexuality with them.   Naturally from our earliest years we are driven to seek out kindred spirits and especially from puberty, we get most desperately interested in examples who belong to the opposite sex. The other sort of Chemistry at work is specifically physical, relating to and being triggered off by the glandular and hormonal systems of the body.  (They are literally and truly chemicals that can be and have been often isolated from the body and analysed in the test tube.)   It is not necessarily detected consciously by the human brain, though some individuals do actually recognize certain smells and tastes that are affected from time to time in the other party.   A lot of the time, we are told by the experts, one is actually unconscious that these sensations are being picked up.   Much of the time they are subliminal, and they affect us regardless of our awareness of them.   These don’t appear to manifest until puberty, when the hormones are kicking in, and we are simply driven to find sexual partners.   Naturally they are designed by nature to force this drive, and bear the advantage or extra feature of triggering off sexual interest and desire (through stimulation of the other’s hormones) in the chosen sexual contacts. My special contention here is of course, that among those parties who are not consciously aware of these emanations, or of distinctly hormonal bodily responses to other person, are most likely a range of Aspies.   Perhaps they actually do have pheromones at work, but are simply not conscious of what they are triggering off.  Maybe in their frequently heavy intellectual nature, these bodily pushes and sensations simply don’t break through, and the individuals miss things that they should be aware of.  It means that the AS folk frequently do not have all of the facilities of their bodies and minds available or at work in order to detect and interpret correctly the sexuality of other people.   I think that my own experience demonstrates this, as well as many examples quoted in the AS literature.   Again and again, I’ve read, and indeed have had several NT women relating to AS males, the description of how the AS ones simply did not recognize sexual ‘come-ons’.  It was just so often the NT female who had to take the initiative not only in advancing the state of the relationship, but in initiating the sexual side.   When first observed, these women can get a bit disconcerted at the untypical nature of the male partner, although at first, they may feel gratified to feel they have located a significantly respectful and restrained male.       It is interesting to note that science has discovered that persons very rarely find these sexual emanations from their family members (and especially their siblings) to be exciting.   Clearly nature has implanted an automatic anti-incestuous process into the human race.   Talking about the involuntary picking up of scents and other emanations between people, another example is the very well-known phenomenon of young women sharing close quarters together, and discovering that after a time, their monthly hormonal cycles  commonly get to coincide, and their rhythms become the same. Now, to get back to the point, - I have been insisting that these two forms of Chemistry are at root, separate distinct and independent.   Again, one is psychological, the other is distinctly and exclusively physical (though it might well be primarily triggered off at times by psychological factors.)    but in the process, each can exist and manifest without the presence of the other.   I am never suggesting that each person may be defined by the influence they may exclusively experience of either one or the other type of Chemistry.   But with one romantic/sexual contact, an individual may purely feel the pressure of the physical chemistry exclusively, or possibly only the psychological. Ideally, and this I think is what a number of my respondents were saying, the early and primary urges of physical/sexual chemistry which brought the two together in the first place, may give way or develop into a more profound interaction in which the metaphorical chemistry of psychological interdependence and appreciation grows and maybe becomes predominant.    This is of course perfectly true.   Clearly many cases of this do occur.    And it’s wonderful whenever it happens.   Of course the two forms do and can work together, and in most successful marriages or relationships, it is probably this that is occurring.  The important point I was making was that psychological/sociological studies, as well as sheer street experience shows that the physical chemistry can affect some people instantly at first meeting.  It is not dependent all the time on getting to know each other.    A casual kiss or physical closeness with a total stranger can and has been proven to literally turn some folks on.   This is one of the factors that is sometimes described as ‘love at first sight’.   Most of us would probably dispute that it should ever be termed as ‘Love’ at all.      Naturally, this ‘love at first sight’ can also be triggered off through psychological factors, as aspects of the voice the ‘other’ or his/her face or figure triggers off instant memories and treasured thoughts of one’s parents or some other crucial persons of the early life.   Maybe the psychological factors are more driving with unconscious desires and needs for compensation for early deprivation.  In this case the instantly desired person may seem to represent the things that have been missing and which the subject feels will fill in. Again, I apologize to all for ‘flogging a dead horse’.    But I did literally feel as though I had been somewhat misunderstood or I’d inadequately explained what I meant.   Now I can rest in peace.    On the other hand, maybe this explanation may give some information that is useful.   Cheers,  Ron.     From: aspires-relationships [mailto:aspires-relationships ] On Behalf Of glassyjanSent: Monday, 18 July 2011 3:48 PMTo: aspires-relationships Subject: Re: janet (john keep out) I am on everyone's side! I see truths coming from both of you. With my relationship with my AS DH, I know I am not his " to die for " wife physically. I can live that. I have also found out that he critiques all women very logically and their faults are blaring to him so he picked the mate that he was comfortable with and that fact I was very comfortable with him was big in his decision to choose me.I do feel that " interchangeable " tone from him, though he doesn't say it, but it is who he is. He doesn't look me in the eye, nor is there any public displays of affection or much spontaneity, but his predictability, honestly (often to a fault), and work ethic turn me on! That's enough chemistry for me!Side note: I am a trained Neuropsychologist and I believe that if you work a certain neural network it will eventually become an expected behavior. A learned response, so to speak. I have worked with my own husband and he feels he has made progress on social interactions. I see the progress as well. Don't get me wrong I am not saying all behavior can be changed, but if a person has a desire to change a behavior and the ability to work hard at changing, it is sometimes possibly to do so. >> Janet,> > ‘ere, just whose side are you on??? You give the perfect example of just what I’m talking about, and then you seem to vote for . This just aint fair!!!> >