Jump to content

aromantic + demisexual = asexual?


Siggy

Recommended Posts

Several months ago, when I first found AVEN, I initially gravitated towards the term "demisexual". My understanding is that demisexual means that you only experience sexual attraction in the context of a pre-existing romantic relationship.

But then it eventually hit me, and it seems so obvious in retrospect. I've never been in a serious romantic relationship, so how could I possibly know that I'm demisexual? What difference would it have made whether I was demisexual or asexual? Either way, I would never have experienced sexual attraction, I would be functionally asexual. And now that I think I'm aromantic, I will probably never be in a serious romantic relationship. So it seems like it will never matter whether I'm asexual or demisexual. The distinction is completely meaningless for me.

My pet theory is that there exists a real qualitative difference between the cause of romantic and aromantic asexuality. It could be that most aromantic asexuals are in fact predisposed to be demisexual. But how would they know? To an aromantic, asexuality and demisexuality produce the exact same results.

This theory has the weakness that it is only based on my own experiences. So does anyone else have any input? Any fatal flaws that I can't see?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Siggy-

I think the confusion is the separation of romantic and sexual attraction...I know i have felt romantic attraction, but it's very hard to differentiate where romantic ends and sexual starts....I guess for sexual people the 2 are completely linked- maybe wanting someone romantically means they want them sexually as well. I didnt' realize the 2 attractions could be separate. My attractions have always been, I like that guy, i would like to be with him, I want him to want to be with me....and that's about it...but none of this info was available 20, 25 years ago...so, i've been together with my husband 20 years, 2 wonderful kids, but just figured out the asexuality thing for me...explains my lack of interest, lack of "passion", and our difficulties, despite having a great relationship in every other aspect.

Anyway, theories are good! Obviously, there's a lack of any real information about asexuality, aromanticism (is that a word?), i don't even know if asexual is the right word...non-sexual? And where has this come from? If we are born with all the working parts, is part of our brain not making some connection? I do know that even if there was a pill to "fix" me, I wouldn't want it...I like me the way i am...even if it has made part of life very challenging.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AFlyingPiglet

I think there is a little confusion over romantic and sexual attraction here, but these things are difficult to work out, and the terms we use can be limiting, and we are all different. Based on my own personal experience - as an aromantic, I have previously been in 'romantic relationships' (that started out as ordinary friendships) hoping that I would experience romantic attraction at some point. One of these relationships did involve sex - again I was hoping that some sort of attraction - romantic, sexual or otherwise would click in - it didn't.

For me, sexual attraction isn't an issue as I don't even get off base with the romantic attraction bit. I have a friend who I have known for over 10 years. He's my best friend and I know he has feelings for me and has previously made them abundantly clear. My understanding is that if I were demisexual, I might become attracted to him as I get to know him over time - well I was very open to this happening but it never has.

It could be that most aromantic asexuals are in fact predisposed to be demisexual.

At BEST this should be reworded to say that - it could be that some aromantic asexuals might be predisposed to be demisexual (although I don't know that I agree with this either). I am sure there have been those who have identified as aromantic and have then experienced romantic attraction, but to suggest that most aromantics are predisposed to be demisexual ...... You may as well say that asexuals actually have latent sexual attraction (and aromantics have latent romantic or sexual attraction) which will kick in when they meet the 'right person'.

But how would they know?

That's a bit like saying how do you know you are Asexual if you've never tried sex? I for one have tried to be 'normal' - because I felt societal pressure to be so, so personally I can say I know because I tried.

Several months ago, when I first found AVEN, I initially gravitated towards the term "demisexual". My understanding is that demisexual means that you only experience sexual attraction in the context of a pre-existing romantic relationship.

My pet theory is that there exists a real qualitative difference between the cause of romantic and aromantic asexuality. It could be that most aromantic asexuals are in fact predisposed to be demisexual. But how would they know? To an aromantic, asexuality and demisexuality produce the exact same results.

It would be good if you could elaborate a little on what you mean here as what you are saying is not that clear, although I could hazard a guess as to what you are saying. I do like the fact you have raised this discussion though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Several months ago, when I first found AVEN, I initially gravitated towards the term "demisexual". My understanding is that demisexual means that you only experience sexual attraction in the context of a pre-existing romantic relationship.

My pet theory is that there exists a real qualitative difference between the cause of romantic and aromantic asexuality. It could be that most aromantic asexuals are in fact predisposed to be demisexual. But how would they know? To an aromantic, asexuality and demisexuality produce the exact same results.

It would be good if you could elaborate a little on what you mean here as what you are saying is not that clear, although I could hazard a guess as to what you are saying. I do like the fact you have raised this discussion though.

My understanding of "demisexual" is this:

romantic attraction ----> sometimes sexual attraction

no romantic attraction ----> no sexual attraction

As opposed to "asexual", which means this:

romantic attraction ----> no sexual attraction

no romantic attraction ----> no sexual attraction

But if you never experience romantic attraction (fully aromantic), the distinction between asexual and demisexual is completely meaningless. Either way, you are effectively asexual. However, that doesn't mean that they're exactly the same. Consider the following hypothetical experiment:

  1. Isolate the things (ie kind of upbringing, specific genes, or whatever) which tend to cause asexuality.
  2. Isolate the things which tend to cause demisexuality.
  3. Consider a large group of aromantic asexuals. How many of them have those things which cause asexuality, and how many have those things which cause demisexuality?

This experiment is, of course, impossible, because we don't know what causes asexuality or demisexuality. But do you get what I'm saying? I'm guessing that many aromantics are "predisposed" to demisexuality in the sense that they have those things which would normally cause demisexuality.

But even if this is true, that does not change the fact that they are, for all intents and purposes, asexual. I do not mean to challenge anyone's self-identity or anything.

It could be that most aromantic asexuals are in fact predisposed to be demisexual.

At BEST this should be reworded to say that - it could be that some aromantic asexuals might be predisposed to be demisexual (although I don't know that I agree with this either). I am sure there have been those who have identified as aromantic and have then experienced romantic attraction, but to suggest that most aromantics are predisposed to be demisexual ...... You may as well say that asexuals actually have latent sexual attraction (and aromantics have latent romantic or sexual attraction) which will kick in when they meet the 'right person'.

You're absolutely right. I have no way of knowing that it's "most" or even "some". It's complete guesswork. Perhaps I should retract, and make a weaker statement: There exist some aromantics which are predisposed to demisexual, but because of their aromanticism they are effectively asexual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think about it logically and stick to strict definitions (which of course not how real life works), if you are aromantic (do not experience romantic attraction) you can't be demisexual (romantic attraction leads to sexual attraction). There is a missing link.

If we go by your initial meaning...

demisexual means that you only experience sexual attraction in the context of a pre-existing romantic relationship

I've asked myself a few times the hypothetical question whether I could get into romantic relationship without romantic attraction and/or whether I would still consider myself aromantic. I also wonder whether the aromantic side or me effects the asexual side, and vice versa, whether they are distinct or or two ways of viewing the same thing.

I would agree that, there would be no use in describing yourself as demisexual unless you intended to get into a relationship. Also, you wouldn't know for sure unless you had been in a few relationships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion...after thinking about it, and having been in a few relationships, and now married to a sexual man (but not realizing that being an asexual could even be possible until finding out about it a few months ago) i'm not sure demi is even the right prefix. Check out some of the information from Dr. Lori Brotto, a Vancouver psychologist who is one of the few professionals to have actually researched a bit about asexuality. Part of her definition includes "a lifelong lack of interest in sex". And that asexuals who are in sexual relationships are experiencing "unwanted but consensual sex" or something like that. Which applies to me...but i'm still wondering, what makes or is necessary for a romantic attraction? How is it separate from sexual attraction? For sexual people, i guess one will lead to the other. And how were asexual people ever to find each other before the internet? Things i'm wondering....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I've just translated this question to the Spanish language boards. Link to the thread. In my opinion as aromantic, it depends on how separate you feel love and sex. I feel them separate, so I think I can't be demi if by divine intervention I felt in love. Oversimplifying, if the probability of romantic or sexual attraction were one over a thousand, the probability both attractions together would be one over a million. I think that intertwinement between sex and love should be another parameter in order tom measure sexual and romantic orientation. This parameter should be bidimensional, since the link love<->sex may be asymmetric. With this new measure, aromantic asexual would be demis or not depending on their love->sex link.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 years later...

Okay, so as someone who has had a very interesting path in figuring out my own sexuality as demisexual, I may have special insight. However, I rarely join in or even read these sort of discussions, so i may have some sort of misunderstanding about the terms.

I consider myself demisexual because I feel asexual very often. However, i used to feel much less asexual, this is called sexual fluidity. It is said around aven and what not, some asexual had a period of partial or slight sexuality while going through adolescence. Another idea i have had through my own introspection, depsite having lost my virginity over 4.5 years ago and the memories being very foggy, that I understood sexual attraction be seeing it in those around me. The friend I ran with at the time were very sexual individuals, talked bout it a lot, etc.. And so I sort of implicitly expected these feelings of myself (there are articles on psychologytoday which discuss expecting yourself to have feelings and not realizing you dont).

Maybe you developed and understand for what romantic feelings would be like so well, you could almost completely emphathize with them. From this perspective, you intuitive felt that you would have sexual feelings if you had these romantic feelings; it was not until you reflected upon the fact that you had never had romantic feelings that your understanding of them become irrelevant. You could actually be a demisexual, but functionally be an asexual.

You may want to ask yourself how important this question really is, nevertheless it provides great insight to demisexuality all together. The fact that you could know that you'd hypothetically have sexual attractions if you had romantic ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...