Visualizer

She cannot make me feel any different when interacting with OTHER adults, but she can provide a kind of "oasis", a "safe space" if you will (I hate that word in general, but it fits here) where we can be there for each other in those moments we don't want to be in the adult world. She can go swinging on the swings at a playground with me, dream about unrealistic things without concern of whether they will ever come to be, play tag in a park, draw fantasy landscapes, or any number of other things. It would take a girl who's also behind in her emotional maturation, but at least I hope it's possible.

Fortunately at my school, graduate students only need to TA for one semester. And seeing as the girls I'd date are most likely in a different specialization (if not in a totally separate 'kind" of field--e.g. arts/language vs. STEM) I don't see this as being a major problem. A bigger problem is it seems that most undergrads at my university are highly extraverted. Though I have started a group for people on the autism spectrum, for both undergrads and grad students.

TakeruK--I suppose that my need to be "significant" arises in large part from my experience growing up, from my "formative years" so to speak. When I was a kid I spent all my free time alone, so I saw myself as "separate" from everyone else. What gave me a place in the world, though, was my unique ability--the fact that academically/intellectually I was way ahead. Also, as I have mentioned before, I didn't go through the "normal" adolescent period of finding a peer group, of finding somewhere where I fit in. So now I think my sense of self with respect to other people is unusually fragile/undeveloped compared to other people's. Also, I think that everyone's happiness in a relationship depends critically on who the other person is and how he/she feels. It's just the nature of relationships. klader--I agree the best way of meeting people is when things just "click". The issue is meeting them to begin with. I don't think I will form close bonds with my cohort because we're in really different periods of our lives and have different emotional needs, aside from getting through graduate school. Especially in my cohort which is only seven people. It's possible that there's someone else like me there--never had a boy/girlfriend, still figuring out who he/she is socially, still has childlike curiosity, would ideally have friends to play playground sort of games with--but it's unlikely with such small numbers. Even my program as a whole is small. It's probably most likely I would meet a match among undergrads, or MAYBE grad students in unrelated fields.

As I said, I DON'T think I'm ready for a "fully adult-type relationship". There are a whole bunch of things included in this, so it's really hard to list them all. Also, none of these things alone really describes it, and some are not even absolutely necessary--it's just the general "tone" of a relationship, that's hard to define precisely. The "someone who hasn't dated a lot of people" probably comes closest. Basically, I'm envisioning someone for whom the whole idea of having a guy like her whom she likes back as being kind of "mythical", because it's something she's never experienced. Like, the girls around her have had boyfriends, but she never thought she'd have one herself. When a guy (hopefully me) finally likes her whom she like back, it would be an almost otherworldly experience. Otherwise, I feel there will be this one-sidedness where I find it otherworldly to have a girlfriend, but she will find it ordinary. Note that this doesn't even require that she consciously *wanted* a boyfriend before--it's possible that she (like me, in high school) just doesn't care about finding anyone because she's too much in her own head. What I mean by someone who seeks a "childlike and playful relationship", though, is someone who has a "virginal" sort of curiosity about the male body, who is kind of starry-eyed, and who really gets carried away when she gets a crush on a guy. Most women my age have seen and touched quite some male bodies and also have gotten to the point where their feelings of "crushes" are much more subdued than when they were teens. All of these combine to make them less attractive. Also, there are just traits that on some very intuitive level convey a certain level of development. Like, ALL the girls I've had crushes on in maybe the last 10 years had facial features that were soft and "cutesy". I like a decent number of Asian girls not because of some kind of fetishistic interest in Asian culture, but because of these cutesy features being more common among them. Also, I'm attracted to mannerisms that are in some way reminiscent of a child, like hyperness, gigglyness, etc. I feel like I have to act really grown up in professional settings, so in romantic settings I want to be able to be myself, which includes being more childlike. Note this doesn't mean that I want a relationship where a girl looks up to me as some sort of parental figure, much less calls me "Daddy" or something weird like that. It's more about not provoking my own sense of being an impostor in the adult world. Interestingly, quite a few girls that have been interested in me have been like 180 degrees from that, like having almost exaggeratedly grown-up-womanish features. Grad school for some weird and inexplicable reason seems to attract these sorts of women too--except for the Asians. I know this is extreme stereotyping but it's something I notice, especially when I compare them to the undergrads at the same university. I also fear that the type I mentioned in the beginning--the ones who find the idea of having a boyfriend almost "mythical", are likely to be hideous and/or have really ugly personalities. In one way it kind of makes sense--why would I be the first guy to like a girl--though on the other hand my lack of dating has had to do with introversion and illness--two things that have nothing to do with my attractiveness per se. A female counterpart of me might have just been late to "get the memo" that people around her had started dating. In some ways I am attracted to what may be called emotional immaturity, like as I mentioned above, tending to get carried away when having crushes. One thing I didn't mention above was it seems that people of grad-school age don't get crushes/fall in love as easily as young teens do, but don't fall out of love as quickly either. That's a part of the disconnect I feel too--I feel like any girl who likes me will like me a lot longer than I will like her, just because I'm still in that more "volatile" stage. I feel that this will keep me from ever really exploring options, because a large number of people I could learn from being in a relationship with will already know what they want too well to give me a chance. In some ways I'd like someone with emotional maturity too--like someone who doesn't spend lots of time gossiping or hate school because it's cool to do so. But I think these are more nerd vs. popular-kid things than maturity things.

It's possible you're right. To be fair, though, you would need to look at how much they dated vs. how many got married. In other words, it's possible that the lack of marriage has more to do with the lack of having boy/girlfriends, period, than lack of readiness to marry when finding someone. In other words, if you followed a group of graduate students and counted the number of romantic involvements of any kind (even if it's just a few weeks or a month) and looked at a "control" group of undergrads who collectively were romantically involved with an equivalent number of people, how much more likely would the graduate students be to marry? I'm not asking you to answer, because obviously this is a tough "study" to do, I'm just making a point. In other words, does the lack of couples relate more to the smaller social world.

I wouldn't doubt my ability to get through graduate school because of it being "nomadic"--it's likely that my first relationships will be on the order of one to a few months rather than years (again, I live in a high-school sort of "mental space" regarding relationships. It's the labor-intensiveness and way that the lives of everyone around you revolves around their work. My mental health is still rather fragile going in, and that could be made worse if I feel cut off from the people I need to achieve non-academic goals. I agree that I need to start out with just meeting people, it's just hard to feel a connection when the people around you feel is some systematic way quite different. I don't know how much what I'm looking for is similar to the relationship in "500 Days of Summer"--I've never seen that movie. If there's any kind of pattern to the kind of girls I've liked, it was that in some ways they resembled the "manic pixie dream girl" trope. Not in the craziness, but in the way they were hyper in mannerisms and quirky, and a bit "existential". Although it's not commonly cited as an example of this trope, the girl in Ghost World is of the type that I'd be interested in if she were even more outcast and less socially aware--the kind who spends her free time drawing cartoons of imaginary worlds.

Oh, and about the title--I meant "catching up" as a process not a goal, as in, having the kind of experiences that others had in middle/high school, so that I (maybe) get to where I want and am ready for relationships more like what other graduate student are having. Even if I could somehow "fake it until I make it" and actually do OK jumping into a fully adult-type relationship, that wouldn't satisfy the underlying need.

As for the "people I don't respect" thing--I interpreted that as referring to people who I think are stupid, morally bankrupt, good for nothing, etc. These were people I found unattractive, but I don't make the rather arrogant step of assuming that people who don't turn me on (either romantically OR sexually) are somehow less morally or humanly worthy people. And as for the reason--I was unsure whether I'd ever meet someone I was attracted to who would like me back, and I was tired of waiting. I think I kind of had four things that I listed as important in a partner: 1) Someone who is new to relationships, like myself, and wants a more childlike and playful relationship 2) Someone who is introverted and intellectual, but not a rival/in the same field 3) Someone I find physically and emotionally (in terms of "raw" mannerisms and the like) attractive to me 4) Someone who fits, logistically and practically speaking, into my life. I'd be willing to put in some work to get someone who fits all/most of these, and if someone "fell into my lap" so to speak, I'd have a relationship that has some drawbacks. My fear is that I'd have to put in lots of work even to get someone who has had umpteen relationships before me, is in my same field, and maybe is only moderately attractive, and even then not be nearly assured of finding someone. I think you're saying that you really are "normal", though--like it wasn't that you had less of a need/willingness for social contact in high school and undergrad than you do now (my pattern), you were social when you're younger and now you're shut in (typical pattern).

knp: I absolutely agree that maturity is not some linear scale. I think, in many ways, that's the problem. Most people never are at a stage where they have the combination of needs and wants that I have, together. I definitely remember how in the period where I was living with parents I tried to get out and socialize, and the only people in my parents' community were the kind of college-dropout, not-knowing-what-to-do-with-their-lives people. There were many times when I thought to myself "Wow, they seem so immature". Like, not only did they not have steady jobs, which didn't bother me, but they had this not-caring attitude about everything that was really annoying. Many of them were also awful with finances, which is an area I am very responsible in (well, not always about remembering to pay bills and whatever, because of executive function issues, but about living within my means, so to speak). The main areas where I feel younger have to do with, 1) self-centeredness, and 2) everything that requires emotional and/or physical intimacy to learn, and 3) things having to do with reproduction/family. I'm not sure #1 even is an age-related thing--I think it has more to do with being disgruntled and depressed because of my illness. It's hard to be motivated to give to others when you feel there is a major way in which they seem to have things better than you. Number 2 has to do with intimacy--since I've never been emotionally close to anyone except for parents, the idea of just being close to someone has a kind of "mystique" for me that it doesn't for most others my age. Also, all the issues that come out of being close to someone (potential to be hurt, knowing when to change and not change for a person, etc.) are things I've only thought about in the abstract. Number 3, I think, is the most important. Many people my age, whether they admit it or show it outwardly or not, are moving toward the stage in life where they could start a family. This is very different from the early teenage years in particular, where people seek a kind of "magical", larger-that-life world in relationships. As people get older, they tend to value security, stability, and the ability to weather life's storms more. Many people also seem to get a kind of "nesting instinct", and a kind of desire to help others grow, which can express itself in mentorship, volunteering, etc. Now, I actually think that kind of "magical", larger-than-lifeness may be easier to achieve in grad school, provided that you're looking for it (like I am), because teenagers typically are not experts enough in anything that they can have original thoughts about it. Whereas, I have many more ideas per week about things I'm curious about than I could ever actually make into research projects, and that I crave an outlet for. If I were to find another person who is new to being in love, we could share a first romance against the backdrop of all these big musings about the intricacy of the universe, which is far richer than some lyric that a teenager hears in some song and thinks "wow, this is really profound". The problem is, most people are already somewhat jaded to love at this point, and won't fall in love over this--they need a good part of "mature person to help build a stable home" traits. St Andrew's Lynx: I agree with that thing about mismatched schedules. But, I see this as more a reason that maybe I shouldn't be in graduate school. Although, the way I see it (at least, the way that therapists have tried to convince me to see it) is that in grad school I'm still on a college campus and have a more flexible schedule than I'd probably have in a "real" job. On the other hand, maybe the fact that I'd stay in grad school or not based on my dating prospects itself shows I'm not in the right place to be in grad school.

That's one of the things that bothers me about graduate school socializing too--how based it is around venues that are 21+. That makes me feel even more cut off from the undergrads. About the counselor, I have been working with several over the past 6 years or so. They agree that I'm probably emotionally much younger than my chronological age, and that I'd probably do best looking for undergrads or graduate students like myself. The harder part is figuring out how to do this/how to find a group of those people who accept me, as you say. Let me ask you this--what would you say is the emotional and "non-colleague-social" stage of life of a first year graduate student? It's quite clear what the professional stage is--finding a research adviser, learning how to contribute substantially to an independent research project, etc. But if you remove work from the "equation", what would you say is the "meaning" of graduate school (just like the whole thing of freedom from parents/rules is separate from the fact of taking classes)? Or, do you think that graduate school is completely defined by one professional life, and outside of that there is no real "meaning" (that the graduate students have in common, I mean--of course there are other things in life)?

Something else, because I realize that knp mentioned it, but I didn't address it above: Yes, the "coolness factor" is super-important. I do want someone who finds my enthusiasm for, and interest in, science, really "cool". And not only that, I want to be able to find something "cool" about what she does, too. Like I said, just the fact that I don't necessarily want to date an intellectual/academic rival doesn't mean I want to date someone without talent or personality, some kind of vacuous teenager stereotype. Also, originality is important. Like, a girl who is obsessed with Disney and goes to Disneyland twice a year and collects all kind of merchandise from the movies just strikes me as kind of two-dimensional. She might be interesting at first because she "seems" young, but it's not really a basis for a relationship. On the other hand, a girl who is so inspired by the fantasy worlds in Disney stories that she invents her own worlds and draws them, complete with detailed maps--now that is cool! My ideas in science are original, so a girl should have an original approach to things too. And yes, I'm well aware that the people who draw the magical worlds in Disney movies are almost certainly all adults. I think therein actually lies the point--there's a difference between sophistication/ability and emotional seriousness. The kind of relationships I am ready for are "younger" in terms of the emotions involved, although being older I will necessarily bring more sophistication into the topics of conversation and the level of depth in which I think about those emotions, just as even though the Disney movies have more childlike content, the quality of the art and animation is above what most children could hope to do. I really think what it all comes down to is curiosity, like me, having studied all the math and science I have, am no longer curious about what variables are or what the circulatory system generally does. Similarly, someone who has been in a long term relationship is much less likely to be curious about what it feels like to cuddle with someone or what it feels like when someone you have a crush on likes you back. They are more likely curious about what went wrong with their other relationships, who they want to spend the rest of their lives with, etc. The issue of what people hope to get out of a relationship is very important, regardless of the level of ability each person brings.

I have to respectfully, but VERY strongly, disagree with a few of the posters here. One thing is that the entire life stage, socially speaking, of graduate students is kind of opposite of my own. Typical graduate students, while smart, were often decently "normal" kids, who had friends and all that, and played at the park together, and whatever. In high school and/or college, they had some sort of relationships, possibly very casual ones, but relationships nonetheless. Now that they are in graduate school, they are for the first time really focusing on their area of interest, and surrounding themselves with others in those areas of interest. This increased commitment to their field tends to come with a more adult level of commitment and seriousness to other areas in their lives, including the emotional ones. In my case, while other kids played at the park with each other, I was in my room thinking about all kinds of intellectual things. I got to high school before I even started to realize how unusual my development had been. At that point I started making friends, but then a chronic illness more or less derailed that. I made it through undergrad, but then in my first attempts at grad school I started to flounder because my illness was taking a severe toll on my mental health. So I moved back in with parents and actually regressed in the sense of becoming more dependent and less able to take on adult responsibilities. Now that I'm back in graduate school I am the most confident I've been in a long time in my ability to keep up with demands, but socially I still feel like the only kid in a group of adults, and I have an overwhelming need to meet people who are NOT on the same science "track" that I am, just as others' worlds are shrinking to almost be more like mine was as a kid. I don't mean that I want to meet "party animals" or ditzes, I'm drawn to other introverted people who have interests and talents in areas far outside of mine--art, music, writing, etc. Not only do these people have something to teach me, to expand my world, but also because of my lack of development in other areas besides scientific abilities, I find it somehow destabilizes my identity to not feel like the smartest person in a group in my field. I have learned to ignore this feeling in a work setting, but at times socially and especially romantically I feel more drawn to people who are NOT my scientific peers. The times I have felt romantic attraction to other science students, it has almost invariably been to ones in a less "mathy" field than my own. But now back to the main idea--I understand how being around more socially mature people can be helpful, IF the goal is to grow socially as quickly as possible. But that's a huge "IF", which happens to be false in my case. My biggest dread is that I will be forced to "grow up too fast" in terms of romantic relationships. I would MUCH rather find someone who is, romantically speaking, more on my level, i.e. with a similar lack of a developed idea of what she wants from a relationship, and a similarly youthful, curious approach to the whole process. Most people my age are already nearing the point where they could get married to someone and even start a family, whereas my desires are much more along the lines of someone with whom to just explore what love FEELS like in the first place. I would hate to be in a one-sided relationship where the other person tries to mold me into a "normal adult" romantically speaking, and won't be content to just explore things with me with the same curiosity that I feel. The idea of this sounds worse to me than no relationship at all. At one point I was even worrying that this delay would eventually culminate in a full-fledged attraction to children, but thankfully it hasn't. It seems I am generally most attracted to people around the 18-20 age range, where they in many ways have the "spirit" of children but are beginning to show signs of intellectual adulthood, i.e. of really looking critically at what they are learning. I agree that this group isn't ideal, as intellectually speaking many of them are still TOO "simple", and yet socially some of them are even already too experienced and grown-up for me. It is certainly possible that there are other graduate students who grew up like myself, who might be better matches than these people. However, such grad students will obviously be few and far between. Also, in response to knp's last comment, my being repulsed with those few sexual partners had zilch to do with lack of "respect". These were nice women, and certainly not with any kind of bad reputation, but physically I found them ugly, and probably more importantly there was a complete and utter absence of any kind of "spark" in terms of their personality. I hope that clarifies things.

I'd imagine the "gearing up for life after college" applies more to older undergrads (seniors and, maybe, juniors) but much less to freshmen and sophomores, though? I'd imagine as a first-year graduate student (and with my social development being where it is, which is more teenage-ish) that I'd get along more with freshmen and maybe sophomores, because they are also new to a school and looking to make new friends, and most of them are closer to that adolescent stage socially. In fact, I'd imagine that certain senior undergraduates may actually be considerably MORE mature in life perspective than me, if they are close to entering the "real world". For me, I always just assumed I'd continue in academia.

This reminds me a little of one school where I applied during my last cycle of applications (the one where I got into the school where I am now). It was a small, not-well-known university that was just branching out into my field of study. During the application process I contacted a few faculty of interest at this university, and asked about their research. I was also contacted by a faculty member whom I did NOT reach out to, who asked to speak to me on the phone. This faculty member obviously really tried to "sell" his lab to me, and from my end it was rather clear that our research philosophies were different and that I wasn't a good fit for his group, but it seemed he didn't see it, or didn't want to. I got invited for the interview, and went. Almost immediately after arriving, in fact possibly a day or two before (I don't quite remember), that faculty member who had contacted me around the time I submitted the application started to invite me to things, i.e. tours of his lab that weren't on the actual recruitment weekend schedule, things like that. I graciously went at the beginning, but then it started to become very awkward, because I had to cut him off to keep my conversations with him from cutting into time that I had other things scheduled (like interviews with faculty I actually wanted to work for). I heard from other prospective graduate students that he had done similar things with them. In fact, he even did borderline unethical things--like there was this award that each graduate department was only supposed to nominate a small number (I think 1 or 2) of students for, and it turned out this one professor had single-handedly nominated ALL of us prospective students in the program for that award. On the last day of the recruitment weekend I was invited for a private talk with the director of admissions, but "Mr. Pushy" was either there too, or he was waiting to talk to me again afterward. I was told that I had a really strong application and not only would be offered admission, but that I could expect a very good funding arrangement if I were to attend that graduate program. Then, it got near April 15 and I had already heard from the other schools, but I was still waiting to hear on that one. I even wrote the director of admissions, asking what had taken so long because I'd been led to believe that I was one of the best applicants. Finally, almost exactly on the 15th, I was told that I had not been admitted. The only thing I can conclude was that Mr. Pushy had swayed the admissions process to let them only accept people who wanted to work in his group.

I was wondering how many of you have had success making lasting friendships/relationships by going to events or clubs at your universities with undergraduates. I strongly feel that at this point in my life I desperately need that opportunity to meet younger people, because I missed out on a considerable amount of social and emotional development in high school and undergrad that will be even much MORE awkward to make up once I get to postdoc/faculty level. Most people I have met at the university where I'm currently studying have been really friendly, and provided I have been somewhere with a "captive audience" (I don't mean literally like people who want to get away but can't, I just mean where people find themselves together one-on-one talking to fill time or whatever, without distractions) I have found that I can really hit it off with people. I'm hoping that if I find a similar situation but with undergrads, they will be just as friendly (of course, I'm not counting any classes I will teach, which are a very inappropriate time to start close friendships or relationships). But, I could really use some encouragement from people who have "been there and done that", to offset the hopelessness I sometimes feel (which will surely lead to burnout if I don't manage it somehow).