The problem with dating services for autistic people.

  • Autistic people struggle to form romantic / sexual relationships
  • Autistic men (diagnosed) outnumber autistic women by orders of magnitude
    • It is not practical to attempt to address relationship difficulties in autism by assisting (diagnosed) autistic people in forming connections with each other only.
      A variety of dating ‘clubs’ and even specialist apps have been created to assist autistic people in dating, but they all focus on hooking up autistic people with each other.

In order to hook up autistic people with non-autistic people a service has to either

  1. Be open to both autistic and non autistic people, or
  2. Have access to a pool of neurotypical ‘volunteers.’

In case 1 the question is

  • how can the service provide a dating advantage to autistic people while still attracting neurotypical people to use the service.

In case 2 the question is

  • how can the service attract neurotypical volunteer ‘dates’ in reasonably large numbers without attracting people who would abuse the volunteer role.
Parents
  • Dating  sites are not for me.  I was on them when I was younger but they tended to result in awkward dates between awkward people.  I met all my sexual partners in the real world and found that easier than meeting them online first.

  • So would you be in favour of in real life events like speed dating and singles nights and singles activities like I suggested?

  • Maybe yeah.  Why? Are genuinely thinking about starting something?

  • The reserch comunity invented it and continues to use it in litrature. When you are creating a study on autistic people you often want to look at only people with normal / high IQs and people with low IQs seperatly. Parents tend to object to their kids being put in the 'low IQ' group. So low functioning is used instead.

    Let me ask you this if I rephrase this:

    I am involved in a number of local autism charities and I do like to remind them from time to time that there are a lot of high IQ autistic people out there who maybe aren’t getting the services from these charities they ought to.

    Do you think that makes it better and more sensative? People are still going to be offended we are 'dividing' autistic people based on IQ sensable as that might be. And it causes confusion because when people hear high IQ they think of someone with an IQ over 115 (above normal) not over 85 (normal and above).

  • I am involved in a number of local autism charities and I do like to remind them from time to time that there are a lot of high functioning autistic people out there who maybe aren’t getting the services from these charities they ought to

    For the general benefit of all involved, I'd respectfully suggest that you don't refer to "high functioning autistic people" when talking to these autism charities.

    "High / low functioning" have never been official diagnostic terms.

    The terminology is widely considered to be problematic for many reasons, as outlined here (among many other places online). For all of our sakes, the less it's perpetuated the better. :)

    https://psychiatry-uk.com/higher-or-lower-why-using-functional-labels-to-describe-autism-is-problematic/

  • If we’re talking about in real life events pestering other people to start something is more likely. I am involved in a number of local autism charities and I do like to remind them from time to time that there are a lot of high functioning autistic people out there who maybe aren’t getting the services from these charities they ought to.

Reply
  • If we’re talking about in real life events pestering other people to start something is more likely. I am involved in a number of local autism charities and I do like to remind them from time to time that there are a lot of high functioning autistic people out there who maybe aren’t getting the services from these charities they ought to.

Children
  • The reserch comunity invented it and continues to use it in litrature. When you are creating a study on autistic people you often want to look at only people with normal / high IQs and people with low IQs seperatly. Parents tend to object to their kids being put in the 'low IQ' group. So low functioning is used instead.

    Let me ask you this if I rephrase this:

    I am involved in a number of local autism charities and I do like to remind them from time to time that there are a lot of high IQ autistic people out there who maybe aren’t getting the services from these charities they ought to.

    Do you think that makes it better and more sensative? People are still going to be offended we are 'dividing' autistic people based on IQ sensable as that might be. And it causes confusion because when people hear high IQ they think of someone with an IQ over 115 (above normal) not over 85 (normal and above).

  • I am involved in a number of local autism charities and I do like to remind them from time to time that there are a lot of high functioning autistic people out there who maybe aren’t getting the services from these charities they ought to

    For the general benefit of all involved, I'd respectfully suggest that you don't refer to "high functioning autistic people" when talking to these autism charities.

    "High / low functioning" have never been official diagnostic terms.

    The terminology is widely considered to be problematic for many reasons, as outlined here (among many other places online). For all of our sakes, the less it's perpetuated the better. :)

    https://psychiatry-uk.com/higher-or-lower-why-using-functional-labels-to-describe-autism-is-problematic/