Misunderstanding relationships

Well maybe he needs to understand that some girls just want to be friends and just because they are nice to him it doesn't mean that they want to marry him. Maybe he doesn't know how to tell the difference between someone who's interested romantically and someone who isn't. Maybe he doesn't realise when he's being rejected? Or doesn't realise when he's being invited. Maybe ask him in more details about his experiences and figure out what he's doing wrong to help him do it better next time. He should also know that it's harder for him than an NT when it comes to relationships so he needs to stay optimistic, motivated to search for love. I think it's better to set his expectations differently as to tell him that it will take time, lot of unsuccessful experiences before he cracks the code. He shouldn't be comparing himself to NTs who get these cues fairly easily. 

I think it's better to set his expectations differently as to tell him that it will take time, lot of unsuccessful experiences before he cracks the code. He shouldn't be comparing himself to NTs who get these cues fairly easily. 

I don't think that will help at all. You may have heard 'the heart wants what the heart wants?' Well that's the way it is. Providing a reason for why something is unfair doesn't make it easier to bare. In fact you you provide a reason for something being unfair as if it were a justification, as if knowing the reason should make it easier, then actually you're making it harder because you're just confirming that you don't really understand how they feel. So now they feel isolated as well as upset over the unfair situation.

I don't understand what's the unfair thing that you are talking about?.

Providing a reason why someone is failing to obtain something while others do seems ok to me. He might lack the understanding of social cues, undirect messages or relationships because he's autistic. We all do in different levels and it does affect our relationships. Knowing why helps me personally to know where my weaknesses are and improve my skills. It also helps me to not compare myself to others who succeeded in ways that I still don't succeed in. It helps me to be gentle with myself and not expect more than I can handle or expect to be able to get what others have as easily as they have it. I know that I have to put extra work and time in certain areas. I think it's very helpful. 

Iain said:

I would love to see the grant application for this LoL.

I imagine it works in rather the same way as the bell ringing society at my old university that got the union to give them entertainment funds for videotapes for people to watch while queueing to ring the bell they only had one or two bells. What they didn’t mention was that the videotapes were in fact porn.

so I imagine you would do something on the lines of ‘we are organising a speed dating event involving a buffet meal and musical background accompaniment’ and fail to mention that the musical background accompaniment is a club DJ and the buffet is in fact a bar.

actually when you rephrase it that way, ‘2 speed dating events one only for autistic men to meet women and one for autistic women to meet men,’ it sounds a lot more palatable.

Peter said:

imagine a highly subsidised Wild Party

I would love to see the grant application for this LoL.

You make good points on how to create a scientific comparison, but I'm not sure the same methodology works when working with a social perception study like this.

It would be difficult to get a meaningful response on the data you want because of the privacy aspects involved, and by only inviting people who are informed that this is a requirement you already create a bias (ie people who don't want to reveal their sorded debauchery won't go).

There are psychologists studying group behaviour who could provide a better model I guess.

I suspect we may be going down a rabbit hole, an interesting one admittedly, so I'll bow out here.

Agreeing to disagree not with standing, actually I think parity is probably reasonably easy to measure. You could probably look at 4 numbers.

1. Proportion of autistic males in marriage or long-term cohabitation
2. proportion of autistic females in marriage or long-term cohabitation
3. for autistic males seeking sex median number of casual sexual encounters per year.
4. for autistic females seeking sex median number of casual sexual encounters per year.

and just compare them to the same numbers for Neurotypicals.

if you define a casual sexual encounter is an encounter occurring within 24 hours of first meeting someone in person. Sure measurements like this I never 100% reliable but it’s a good chance that the biases and errors will even out on both the autistic and Neurotypical side to make the comparisons meaningful.….

also with regards to not wanting Neurotypicals to have to change against their will, it’s worth noting that probably the easiest sort of advantage you could give autistic people would apply in an opt in system. The simplest way to try and give autistic people an edge would probably be to throw them a free party and invite lots of eligible members of the opposite sex.

imagine a highly subsidised Wild Party which only autistic men could enter and that females could get in for significantly cheaper than the entertainment and hospitality in the local area. And then imagine the next week you do the same thing but the genders are reversed. And then you probably have some gay parties for autistic people somewhere else. No Neurotypical is forced to come to the party where they will be surrounded by autistic people of the opposite sex. But they do so anyway to have highly subsidised hospitality and entertainment. That would be one really easy way of giving autistic people an advantage to even the playing field and the Neurotypicals  involved are opting into it.

Peter said:

I'm fine with both conflict and disruption. Very few things worth changing in the world have ever been achieved without conflict and disruption.

I think we are at the stage where we agree to disagree - your view is valid as is mine.

What we need to take into consideration is what the other 90% of the population think. Are they happy for a small minority like us expecting them to change because some of this small minority want them to?

What is an equal number of us don't want them to have to change - does this cancel out those who do?

The definition of parity here is going to be really hard to nail down without a consensus of opinion I feel.

I don't want to get into that arguement here as I think it needs its own thread ideally since it is such a big topic all on its own. It would benefit from having the arguements laid out from both sides with polls on differente aspects to assess the opinions of the people here.

Your passion on the subject is commendable and I do appreciate your reasoned arguements.

Iain said:

I don't think parity is possible. We are different and need to embrace that.

And respectfully this is why I can't accept the approach typically labeled as 'realism.' Different shouldn't mean a lack of parity. In a world where some genetic quirk meant 99% of of people were autistic it would be the neurotypicals at a disadvantage. A world that excludes people for being different shouldn't be tolerated. Even if that involves some conflict and disruption.

It's been my observation that when people say they want 'realistic' options what they generally want is options that don't involve conflict or disruption. I'm fine with both conflict and disruption. Very few things worth changing in the world have ever been achieved without conflict and disruption.

I would say in most situations equality is only fair. There often isn't a distinction and I really don't see one here.

Iain said:

maybe other avenues should be explored that meet your needs (dating another autist, hook up sites for sex, special interest groups to meet like minded people that may lead to dates etc).

Indeed but these sorts of things are examples of the kinds of things that can be done to give autistic people a 'boost' relative to their neurotypical peers. Special groups to help autistic people date each other. Speed dating events that offer preferential terms to autistic people. Hook up apps made specifically with autistic people in mind. Fully funded special interest groups where people can develop social circles (with in which they can date) around their special interests. But this cost money. Just like ramps and lifts etc.

Peter said:

There has to be give and take. Neurotypicals will need to meet us half way, even if they are more numerous.

That is a compromise and one I think we are unlikely to see in our lifetime.

Yes, I'm not an idealist - I'm a realist and that gets results. Idealism is something that leads to a "one day it may happen" situation and while I push for this too, I try to emphasise that when something wants something next week then they need to adopt a different approach or maybe even accept that they are unlikely to succeed without using masking techniques for now.

Peter said:

I think there are a lot of autistic people who can't adapt to the degree nessicery to achieve parity,

I don't think parity is possible. We are different and need to embrace that. If we want to expect another group to change who they are to meet us half way then is this reasonable if we don't want to change ourselves?

What you refer to here is equality, not fairness. Fairness is about both sides finding a balance that works for both, but for relationships it starts as a matter of attraction and we as autists are handed a fundamentally unfair situation by life in this case.

If we already appear as "off" to an NT then we are probably going to not be attractive. Without this attraction, it is very hard to move to even start a relationship unless we do some masking to overcome the initial barrier.

If we cannot mask to do this then I think it only reasonable to point out that there is no other straightforward way to date in the more conventional ways and maybe other avenues should be explored that meet your needs (dating another autist, hook up sites for sex, special interest groups to meet like minded people that may lead to dates etc).

This is my view only and I understand your perspective too which is equally valid.

Thank you for the well reasoned discussion.

Iain said:

Society isn't fair nor should we expect it to be - that is a long way away yet. We need to deal with reality instead.

Respectfully disagree. I have this argument about idealism a lot. But I believe with idealism you really need to adopt the whole "shoot for the moon, you'll fall among the stars" approach.

I think there are a lot of autistic people who can't adapt to the degree nessicery to achieve parity, and even if they could the effort, stress and the negative side effects would be debilitating. Your argument to me largely sounds like 'if you want love / sex you need to be good at masking and do it any time you're with partner / prospective partner.' Not only is that unfair it's probably really damaging to mental health. There has to be give and take. Neurotypicals will need to meet us half way, even if they are more numerous.

Peter said:

The problem with your perspective is it puts the guilt and onus on autistic people for not adapting to neurotypical people norms and standards.

Yes, I think the onus is largely on us to adapt to the behaviours of the vast majority of people if we want to be accepted into their relationships.

It sucks I know, but my reasoning is that most of us want to be a part of their group and enjoy the things that bring with it. To do this we cannot expect them to bend to our needs as much as we would like it to be the case.

We essentially want an "in" to their social intimacies which is the one area we, as autists, are largely deficient in, so we need to educate ourselves in what is appropriate behaviour and how we are expected to respond to social cues.

Our lack of social graces and sometimes odd ways of talking, facial expressions and stimming makes us seem "off" to most NTs and will be a real turn off since most want a connection and shared behaviours to feel comfortable enough to be intimate.

If we can mask enough to get the conversations going and show more of our authentic natures then any spark enough to move the relationship to the next stages will happen if it is there, but we need to learn to see if it is there or not (typically through talking) so we don't misinterprit the signals that are intuitive to other NTs.

So in summary I think we are the ones who need to carry the bulk of the responsibility here as we are the ones with the social deficiencies and who want access to the relationships that this brings (talking here about those who do actually want it, not all autists).

Society isn't fair nor should we expect it to be - that is a long way away yet. We need to deal with reality instead.

The problem with your perspective is it puts the guilt and onus on autistic people for not adapting to neurotypical people norms and standards. You wouldn't say to a wheelchair use, 'well you can learn to use crutches' (even if they can with difficulty do that).

We're not talking about an entitlement to access to any one person. We're talking about access to a social experience which is something you can very much treat in an impersonal way even if in involves interaction with people (who of course can not be treated in an impersonal way). Its the difference between saying the accused has a right to a lawyer and the accused has a right to be represented by a particularly lawyer. Autistic people have a right to parity of inclusion when it comes to relationships and sex in comparison to neurotypical people.

lets switch analogies. A university wants to make sure an engineering exam with essay style questions is fair to dyslexic students. There is really no reason why dyslexia should reduce competency in engineering. But dyslexic people struggle with essay style questions. So they give them extra time, but how much? Well you could do it using statistics. Keep adding extra time each year until the past rate for dyslexic students is about the same as non dyslexic.

I think you can make the argument for special programs and adjustments to help autistic people with sex and dating. And I think you would know when those adjustments have gone far enough when autistic people are about as successful as their neurotyical peers.

I don't think that has to be exclusively helping autistic people improve their social skills. I think creating environments that normalise autistic traits in neurotypical groups also has a role to play. I think going forward there should be a push to normalise the autistic perspective in neurotypical circles.

That doesn't mean a particular person has to have sex or be in a relationship with an autistic person though. which is what you seem to be suggesting.

Thank you lain for putting time to write this great comment. I totally agree with you. I'm very grateful that you are doing what you are doing in educating young men or stopping the predators in your real life. I feel safer reading this. If I'm about to write about the fear, harrasment, invalidation, objectifying, demeaning behaviours, stereotyping, unobtained opportunities and abuse that I have went through because of sexism and toxic masculinity I'd be writing few pages. 

Peter said:

Personally I’d take the same approach and take to any other issue with disability. Giving autistic people access to dating is the same as giving wheelchair-bound persons access to services in a building.

Thanks for taking the time to write this response Peter.

I'll question the assumption of the reply as I think it highlights a common issue in the thinking of male autists, myself included in the past. Please don't take it as an attack personally.

The issue here is that we are drawing parrallels between access to peoples emotional and physical receptability (relationships and sex in other words) to access to an inanimate object (the building).

I think much of this comes from our male and autistic connection to emotions, and the possible projection of our wants/needs onto others in the hope that they will reciprocate.

As a teenager at uni I remember seeing so many hookups going on at parties and thinking "why won't the girls put out for me". I felt resentful at times but kept trying and it was only once I stopped trying and became more of my unguarded self that I was approached and chatted up.

The reasons for the failures were a combination of the masking making me seem a bit too fake and also the autistic facial behavious - if that is the right term - made me seem odd/creepy.

I've been lucky and had a number of long term partners over the years who have explained to me what I was doing "wrong" and I became a bit of a project to make me more acceptable in social company.

There were great masking and scripting lessons in all that, but more importantly by far I got to see the "objects" that I had been lusting after as people rather than a goal.

Decades later I have now grown a deeper understanding and appreciation of the damage that men have and are causing to women by our objectification. Seeing how women have to take care not to be in certain places, not to wear things that are too revealing or simply being pretty in order to avoid harassment or worse by me has been an eye opener.

Fixing this toxic masculinity is something that is going to take at least a generation in my view but I to offer any support to women now when I see this in public, and will go out of my way to try to educate the new generation of males in what is acceptable behaviour and why.

This is a big and gnarly subject with accusations of patronisation thrown about by the victims in some encounters or plain old aggresion from the males. I can't make everything right but I can try to stop the predators when I see them or where I see them forming.

I'm sure there is an element of the ingrained sexism in me still but I know what is right and why and it is my actions that will do the speaking for me.

Wow, this went off at a tangent.

Going forward I think the female perspective is going to be a key one in educating make youth in how to behave on the dating scene, so I'll try to put together a discussion topic on advice for this.

If we can understand what NT and autistic women want in a potential dating approach then we can educate the boys in how to behave and engage in that conversation. As for the later stages of that dating process - that will depend on whether the spark is there and that is going to be a quite different subject to discuss.

Thanks for reading this far 

Personally I’d take the same approach and take to any other issue with disability. Giving autistic people access to dating is the same as giving wheelchair-bound persons access to services in a building.

1. you can alter things permanently for everybody like turning stairs into ramps, maybe not everywhere but in enough places that people can get in and do what they need to do.
2. you can bring the services outside making A special arrangement for disabled people to be able to access them without going through normal channels.
3. you can provide disabled people with special equipment and opportunities, powered exoskeletons so they can walk upstairs. Etc

as a society for most disabled people we had acknowledged that option one is usually the best. we require most major Service providers to adjust things so that disabled people will have access on the same basis as non-disabled people even if that means adjusting somethings permanently for non-disabled people. We aren’t required to change everything, buildings are still allowed to have stairs, but we have to have lifts and ramps too.

i’m not saying the entire dating scene should change just for autistic people. but it would be nice if there was significant pockets within it that operated in a unashamedly autistic friendly way. which frankly right now there isn’t.

Peter said:

I wish society was better adjusted to us. Including the dating thing.

A serious question here (an open one at that) - we are estimated to be less than 10% of the population so is it reasonable to expect the majority to adjust to the minority?

I too wish it was so, but if we exect society ro adjust to the needs of every minority, this would lead to the majority feeling quite marginalised.

Just looking for a discussion rather than advocating any particular path.

Peter said:

I wish society was better adjusted to us. Including the dating thing.

A serious question here (an open one at that) - we are estimated to be less than 10% of the population so is it reasonable to expect the majority to adjust to the minority?

I too wish it was so, but if we exect society ro adjust to the needs of every minority, this would lead to the majority feeling quite marginalised.

Just looking for a discussion rather than advocating any particular path.

Iain said:

I would love to see the grant application for this LoL.

I imagine it works in rather the same way as the bell ringing society at my old university that got the union to give them entertainment funds for videotapes for people to watch while queueing to ring the bell they only had one or two bells. What they didn’t mention was that the videotapes were in fact porn.

so I imagine you would do something on the lines of ‘we are organising a speed dating event involving a buffet meal and musical background accompaniment’ and fail to mention that the musical background accompaniment is a club DJ and the buffet is in fact a bar.

actually when you rephrase it that way, ‘2 speed dating events one only for autistic men to meet women and one for autistic women to meet men,’ it sounds a lot more palatable.

Peter said:

imagine a highly subsidised Wild Party

I would love to see the grant application for this LoL.

You make good points on how to create a scientific comparison, but I'm not sure the same methodology works when working with a social perception study like this.

It would be difficult to get a meaningful response on the data you want because of the privacy aspects involved, and by only inviting people who are informed that this is a requirement you already create a bias (ie people who don't want to reveal their sorded debauchery won't go).

There are psychologists studying group behaviour who could provide a better model I guess.

I suspect we may be going down a rabbit hole, an interesting one admittedly, so I'll bow out here.

Agreeing to disagree not with standing, actually I think parity is probably reasonably easy to measure. You could probably look at 4 numbers.

1. Proportion of autistic males in marriage or long-term cohabitation
2. proportion of autistic females in marriage or long-term cohabitation
3. for autistic males seeking sex median number of casual sexual encounters per year.
4. for autistic females seeking sex median number of casual sexual encounters per year.

and just compare them to the same numbers for Neurotypicals.

if you define a casual sexual encounter is an encounter occurring within 24 hours of first meeting someone in person. Sure measurements like this I never 100% reliable but it’s a good chance that the biases and errors will even out on both the autistic and Neurotypical side to make the comparisons meaningful.….

also with regards to not wanting Neurotypicals to have to change against their will, it’s worth noting that probably the easiest sort of advantage you could give autistic people would apply in an opt in system. The simplest way to try and give autistic people an edge would probably be to throw them a free party and invite lots of eligible members of the opposite sex.

imagine a highly subsidised Wild Party which only autistic men could enter and that females could get in for significantly cheaper than the entertainment and hospitality in the local area. And then imagine the next week you do the same thing but the genders are reversed. And then you probably have some gay parties for autistic people somewhere else. No Neurotypical is forced to come to the party where they will be surrounded by autistic people of the opposite sex. But they do so anyway to have highly subsidised hospitality and entertainment. That would be one really easy way of giving autistic people an advantage to even the playing field and the Neurotypicals  involved are opting into it.

Peter said:

I'm fine with both conflict and disruption. Very few things worth changing in the world have ever been achieved without conflict and disruption.

I think we are at the stage where we agree to disagree - your view is valid as is mine.

What we need to take into consideration is what the other 90% of the population think. Are they happy for a small minority like us expecting them to change because some of this small minority want them to?

What is an equal number of us don't want them to have to change - does this cancel out those who do?

The definition of parity here is going to be really hard to nail down without a consensus of opinion I feel.

I don't want to get into that arguement here as I think it needs its own thread ideally since it is such a big topic all on its own. It would benefit from having the arguements laid out from both sides with polls on differente aspects to assess the opinions of the people here.

Your passion on the subject is commendable and I do appreciate your reasoned arguements.

Iain said:

I don't think parity is possible. We are different and need to embrace that.

And respectfully this is why I can't accept the approach typically labeled as 'realism.' Different shouldn't mean a lack of parity. In a world where some genetic quirk meant 99% of of people were autistic it would be the neurotypicals at a disadvantage. A world that excludes people for being different shouldn't be tolerated. Even if that involves some conflict and disruption.

It's been my observation that when people say they want 'realistic' options what they generally want is options that don't involve conflict or disruption. I'm fine with both conflict and disruption. Very few things worth changing in the world have ever been achieved without conflict and disruption.

I would say in most situations equality is only fair. There often isn't a distinction and I really don't see one here.

Iain said:

maybe other avenues should be explored that meet your needs (dating another autist, hook up sites for sex, special interest groups to meet like minded people that may lead to dates etc).

Indeed but these sorts of things are examples of the kinds of things that can be done to give autistic people a 'boost' relative to their neurotypical peers. Special groups to help autistic people date each other. Speed dating events that offer preferential terms to autistic people. Hook up apps made specifically with autistic people in mind. Fully funded special interest groups where people can develop social circles (with in which they can date) around their special interests. But this cost money. Just like ramps and lifts etc.

Peter said:

There has to be give and take. Neurotypicals will need to meet us half way, even if they are more numerous.

That is a compromise and one I think we are unlikely to see in our lifetime.

Yes, I'm not an idealist - I'm a realist and that gets results. Idealism is something that leads to a "one day it may happen" situation and while I push for this too, I try to emphasise that when something wants something next week then they need to adopt a different approach or maybe even accept that they are unlikely to succeed without using masking techniques for now.

Peter said:

I think there are a lot of autistic people who can't adapt to the degree nessicery to achieve parity,

I don't think parity is possible. We are different and need to embrace that. If we want to expect another group to change who they are to meet us half way then is this reasonable if we don't want to change ourselves?

What you refer to here is equality, not fairness. Fairness is about both sides finding a balance that works for both, but for relationships it starts as a matter of attraction and we as autists are handed a fundamentally unfair situation by life in this case.

If we already appear as "off" to an NT then we are probably going to not be attractive. Without this attraction, it is very hard to move to even start a relationship unless we do some masking to overcome the initial barrier.

If we cannot mask to do this then I think it only reasonable to point out that there is no other straightforward way to date in the more conventional ways and maybe other avenues should be explored that meet your needs (dating another autist, hook up sites for sex, special interest groups to meet like minded people that may lead to dates etc).

This is my view only and I understand your perspective too which is equally valid.

Thank you for the well reasoned discussion.

Iain said:

Society isn't fair nor should we expect it to be - that is a long way away yet. We need to deal with reality instead.

Respectfully disagree. I have this argument about idealism a lot. But I believe with idealism you really need to adopt the whole "shoot for the moon, you'll fall among the stars" approach.

I think there are a lot of autistic people who can't adapt to the degree nessicery to achieve parity, and even if they could the effort, stress and the negative side effects would be debilitating. Your argument to me largely sounds like 'if you want love / sex you need to be good at masking and do it any time you're with partner / prospective partner.' Not only is that unfair it's probably really damaging to mental health. There has to be give and take. Neurotypicals will need to meet us half way, even if they are more numerous.

Peter said:

The problem with your perspective is it puts the guilt and onus on autistic people for not adapting to neurotypical people norms and standards.

Yes, I think the onus is largely on us to adapt to the behaviours of the vast majority of people if we want to be accepted into their relationships.

It sucks I know, but my reasoning is that most of us want to be a part of their group and enjoy the things that bring with it. To do this we cannot expect them to bend to our needs as much as we would like it to be the case.

We essentially want an "in" to their social intimacies which is the one area we, as autists, are largely deficient in, so we need to educate ourselves in what is appropriate behaviour and how we are expected to respond to social cues.

Our lack of social graces and sometimes odd ways of talking, facial expressions and stimming makes us seem "off" to most NTs and will be a real turn off since most want a connection and shared behaviours to feel comfortable enough to be intimate.

If we can mask enough to get the conversations going and show more of our authentic natures then any spark enough to move the relationship to the next stages will happen if it is there, but we need to learn to see if it is there or not (typically through talking) so we don't misinterprit the signals that are intuitive to other NTs.

So in summary I think we are the ones who need to carry the bulk of the responsibility here as we are the ones with the social deficiencies and who want access to the relationships that this brings (talking here about those who do actually want it, not all autists).

Society isn't fair nor should we expect it to be - that is a long way away yet. We need to deal with reality instead.

The problem with your perspective is it puts the guilt and onus on autistic people for not adapting to neurotypical people norms and standards. You wouldn't say to a wheelchair use, 'well you can learn to use crutches' (even if they can with difficulty do that).

We're not talking about an entitlement to access to any one person. We're talking about access to a social experience which is something you can very much treat in an impersonal way even if in involves interaction with people (who of course can not be treated in an impersonal way). Its the difference between saying the accused has a right to a lawyer and the accused has a right to be represented by a particularly lawyer. Autistic people have a right to parity of inclusion when it comes to relationships and sex in comparison to neurotypical people.

lets switch analogies. A university wants to make sure an engineering exam with essay style questions is fair to dyslexic students. There is really no reason why dyslexia should reduce competency in engineering. But dyslexic people struggle with essay style questions. So they give them extra time, but how much? Well you could do it using statistics. Keep adding extra time each year until the past rate for dyslexic students is about the same as non dyslexic.

I think you can make the argument for special programs and adjustments to help autistic people with sex and dating. And I think you would know when those adjustments have gone far enough when autistic people are about as successful as their neurotyical peers.

I don't think that has to be exclusively helping autistic people improve their social skills. I think creating environments that normalise autistic traits in neurotypical groups also has a role to play. I think going forward there should be a push to normalise the autistic perspective in neurotypical circles.

That doesn't mean a particular person has to have sex or be in a relationship with an autistic person though. which is what you seem to be suggesting.

Thank you lain for putting time to write this great comment. I totally agree with you. I'm very grateful that you are doing what you are doing in educating young men or stopping the predators in your real life. I feel safer reading this. If I'm about to write about the fear, harrasment, invalidation, objectifying, demeaning behaviours, stereotyping, unobtained opportunities and abuse that I have went through because of sexism and toxic masculinity I'd be writing few pages. 

Peter said:

Personally I’d take the same approach and take to any other issue with disability. Giving autistic people access to dating is the same as giving wheelchair-bound persons access to services in a building.

Thanks for taking the time to write this response Peter.

I'll question the assumption of the reply as I think it highlights a common issue in the thinking of male autists, myself included in the past. Please don't take it as an attack personally.

The issue here is that we are drawing parrallels between access to peoples emotional and physical receptability (relationships and sex in other words) to access to an inanimate object (the building).

I think much of this comes from our male and autistic connection to emotions, and the possible projection of our wants/needs onto others in the hope that they will reciprocate.

As a teenager at uni I remember seeing so many hookups going on at parties and thinking "why won't the girls put out for me". I felt resentful at times but kept trying and it was only once I stopped trying and became more of my unguarded self that I was approached and chatted up.

The reasons for the failures were a combination of the masking making me seem a bit too fake and also the autistic facial behavious - if that is the right term - made me seem odd/creepy.

I've been lucky and had a number of long term partners over the years who have explained to me what I was doing "wrong" and I became a bit of a project to make me more acceptable in social company.

There were great masking and scripting lessons in all that, but more importantly by far I got to see the "objects" that I had been lusting after as people rather than a goal.

Decades later I have now grown a deeper understanding and appreciation of the damage that men have and are causing to women by our objectification. Seeing how women have to take care not to be in certain places, not to wear things that are too revealing or simply being pretty in order to avoid harassment or worse by me has been an eye opener.

Fixing this toxic masculinity is something that is going to take at least a generation in my view but I to offer any support to women now when I see this in public, and will go out of my way to try to educate the new generation of males in what is acceptable behaviour and why.

This is a big and gnarly subject with accusations of patronisation thrown about by the victims in some encounters or plain old aggresion from the males. I can't make everything right but I can try to stop the predators when I see them or where I see them forming.

I'm sure there is an element of the ingrained sexism in me still but I know what is right and why and it is my actions that will do the speaking for me.

Wow, this went off at a tangent.

Going forward I think the female perspective is going to be a key one in educating make youth in how to behave on the dating scene, so I'll try to put together a discussion topic on advice for this.

If we can understand what NT and autistic women want in a potential dating approach then we can educate the boys in how to behave and engage in that conversation. As for the later stages of that dating process - that will depend on whether the spark is there and that is going to be a quite different subject to discuss.

Thanks for reading this far 

Personally I’d take the same approach and take to any other issue with disability. Giving autistic people access to dating is the same as giving wheelchair-bound persons access to services in a building.

1. you can alter things permanently for everybody like turning stairs into ramps, maybe not everywhere but in enough places that people can get in and do what they need to do.
2. you can bring the services outside making A special arrangement for disabled people to be able to access them without going through normal channels.
3. you can provide disabled people with special equipment and opportunities, powered exoskeletons so they can walk upstairs. Etc

as a society for most disabled people we had acknowledged that option one is usually the best. we require most major Service providers to adjust things so that disabled people will have access on the same basis as non-disabled people even if that means adjusting somethings permanently for non-disabled people. We aren’t required to change everything, buildings are still allowed to have stairs, but we have to have lifts and ramps too.

i’m not saying the entire dating scene should change just for autistic people. but it would be nice if there was significant pockets within it that operated in a unashamedly autistic friendly way. which frankly right now there isn’t.