Sex = Love?

[saiayoko]

So I'm watching a movie on the TV guide network while doing my homework... (I know, I should do one or the other...) and some movie is on, and the guy IS an asexual. I know, simply because of all the glaringly obvious clues. It's called "The Mirror Has Two Faces"

Anyway, the actual topic:

The girl just left the asexual guy because she doesn't think he loves her because he didn't want to have sex. Is this how the sexual population truly view the romantic side of relationships? That if someone doesn't want to have intercourse, then they must not love the other person?

I think this is absolutely preposterous, and yet, it seems completely logical when attempting to think about it from the other perspective... but it still seems outlandish and rude.

So... I'm just curious to know what anyone else thinks about this sort of thing,

[MoraDollie]

Some people exist solely for the sex.Others actually want the "whole package" when it comes to relationships (cuddling, talking, holding hands, sex, kissing, etc...). It really depends on the individual. Some non-aces are perfectly happy not having sex with their asexual partner while others demand some sort of "schedule" with them. Some non-ace relationships (all parties involved aren't asexual) sometimes have zero sex while others only have it every now and again. Again, very individualistic.

The girl just left the asexual guy because she doesn't think he loves her because he didn't want to have sex. Is this how the sexual population truly view the romantic side of relationships? That if someone doesn't want to have intercourse, then they must not love the other person?

[StormchasingGal98]

I hate it when people leave their Asexual (Or even any other sexualities) Boyfriends/Girlfriends, just because they don't want to have sex. :p It is kinda like the pharse people say all the time, Sex = Babies, which is not true all the time. Sex doesn't just have to be about making babies, it's more then that. However, I also hate the phrase, Sex = Love. That is not all the way true, sure, Sex is a type of love, but that is not what love is all about. Love is how you feel towards a person, It's a strong bond between you and that person. People just can't seem to understand this. Sex is fine in a realtionship if people want it, but that shouldn't be all what love is and what having a relationship should mean.

[whitesphere]

I think it truly depends on the person. I have heard several counselors specifically say that sex is the core of a romantic relationship. A great "relationship" without sex is "just" a friendship, to them. And I have seen sexual people incredibly frustrated with their sexual partner if the sex isn't at a frequency and quality to meet their needs. For (sexual) marriages, the 3 issues which cause divorce most often are: money, family and sex.

From that I conclude sex is a core relationship need for sexuals. However, HOW important it is can vary across a broad spectrum. Some sexual partners have such a low sex drive that a high quality relationship with occasional sex is OK. Some sexual partners have a very high sex drive and, for them, an asexual WOULD be someone they would probably end up leaving, because a high priority core need isn't being met for them.

Now, is sex love for sexuals? That's a more interesting question. If you're talking a very sexual, old-fashioned man, often they can only feel emotionally open to their partner when or right after they have sex. And old-fashioned women often flat out intertwine love and sex even more deeply.

Using today's mores? Well, near as I can tell, someone who is sexual would on some level feel something is "missing" or "wrong" if their partner wasn't having sex with them.

I've heard very spiritual sexual people specifically say "Sex is the closest you can ever be with someone on the physical plane." So, to them, the deepest, most loving connection with a person, which lacked sex, would not be complete. They could certainly be close friends and cherish the asexual deeply but romance? No.

So, to summarize, for a sexual person, love does not EQUAL sex, but romantic love INCLUDES sex to some degree. A perfect romantic partner, to a sexual person, is someone with whom they share a deep emotional, intellectual, spiritual and yes, physical connection which includes sex as a core component. Now, HOW important sex is to a particular person? There is absolutely no way to tell without asking the actual person. Basically, sex is a subset of romantic love but not equivalent to it.

I don't think it's reasonable that EVERY sexual person will leave EVERY asexual person, but in the drastically over-simplified world of movies and TV, I don't think most writers are up to the task of showing a complex, nuanced sexual-asexual romantic relationship where the couple communicates to address each person's needs. Many writers barely know asexuals exist, so it's a far way from understanding the nuanced views necessary to avoid a caricature of asexuality.

Look at the way writers portrayed, say, homosexuals in the 1980s movie Mannequin. Granted it was a comedy but the gay character, although portrayed as a good man, was a walking stereotype. It hasn't been until, say, 10 years ago that homosexual characters were portrayed with some real human depth. I expect it to take awhile for asexuals to be portrayed the same way.

[Guest]

I've seen that movie. I didn't see the guy as asexual, considering his reasons for not wanting to have sex was that he got SO into it that he COMPLETELY lost his mind and couldn't think rationally, or find a healthy relationship with the distraction.

But.. yes sex is a big deal to many people. And without it, a relationship doesn't feel loving. And it's OK for them. Just like some people need cuddles, or verbal affirmations.

And it's OK to not want sex. It runs the risk a person may find you incompatible, but so does EVERYTHING. Liking country music or not can be a deal breaker to some people.

[GRexCarolinii]

from my experience sadly... this is very true

whilst it obviously varies with person to person

my Ex really really struggled to understand me because I didn't want sex
the amount of times he accused me of wanting a 'platonic relationship' with him, just because I didn't want sex.... it was rather hurtful if honest
this then moved onto me wanting a 'platonic relationship, but with more cuddling'
it took him ages to fully understand that I wanted romantic love

and even then... it was too hard on the both of us

not to say some people aren't different, that they can see a relationship beyond just sex and such
and not to say people can't learn either

[Guest Sheka4]

I want to say that it depends on the person. There are some people that equate sex to love, some people that don't, and some people that equate sensual activities (i.e. cuddling, kissing, etc.) to love. I can't really input my own opinion into this topic, becuase I have never experienced love and I'm not ready to and I've never experienced sex either. So I'm just going to say that the mechanics of love depend on the person.

[Gawizneigs]

I think it truly depends on the person. I have heard several counselors specifically say that sex is the core of a romantic relationship. A great "relationship" without sex is "just" a friendship, to them.

That's ridiculous. Having sex with someone is no greater of an indication of romantic attraction than hugging is an indication a sexual attraction.

[truthisbest7]

I believe that sex is VERY deeply connected with the whole LOVE thing. That many people cannot differentiate between the two. And cannot disconnect the two no matter how hard they try.......I think it is very sad. My husband is a prime example. To him, he believes that I do not "love" him as much as before because I will not have "sexual intercourse" with him like we used to. OR, he also believed for a while (FALSELY) That I had to be having an affair or something because I enjoyed being with him to hang out and talk and do everything else together but I did not want to "BE" with him physically. So obviously the next step from there had to be the fact that I am having an affair, right? Wrong. So, yes it is incredibly difficult for sexual people to get past this issue. almost impossible. Unless you know this person extremely well and they trust you explicitly.

[TokiC]

Well that was the case with my ex, I remember one conversation, where I told my ex that I just didn't feel any sexual urges, not that sex did not feel good to me. And I remember my ex went silent...then said maybe I would find someone that I truly love enough to feel that way. And my ex was a very sexual person, but at the end of things...I think she felt that I did not love her enough that she had to have an affair and things ended shorted afterwards. For some people, they really do equate sex with how much a person loves you back...at the end of the day, you just have to find the right person that understands I guess

[MC Dusters]

yes, yes. To be blunt, yes. You either have sex with them, proclaim you are getting vaginal cramps or you leave them. (not much of a hyperbole)

[Excandesco]

As someone who was sexual. I did equate sex with love. Not solely, but both love and sex were strongly intertwined. Can I love someone fully now without that sexual love? I think so. But, there would be something missing.

I know that the thing I can't offer is extremely important. Sex can be really special.

As for the attempt to disconnect love and sex. Just because they can be disconnected. It doesn't mean that certain people actually can or want to.

[iamphoenixfire]

i think when it comes to sex and love, for me, there is a connection. but it isn't always romantic.

for me, a friend and i have decided that, as we are both single and very attracted to each other, we want to have a sexual relationship. but not a romantic one. neither of us could ever imagine that in the other person. the emotional connection between us runs deep- we know each other really, really well. there is love there- but it's not romantic. it's friend love. both of us are very "emotions are separate from our bodies" kind of people. but when it comes to the sexual stuff that love shows in respect for the other person. and its really quite amazing.

so overall: sex does not always equal love. love does not always equal sex. but they can, and they do for a lot of people. but they don't always have to be romantic love.

[WhenSummersGone]

I can see how friends with benefits is a type of love but sex doesn't mean there is love involved. I'm surprised people still think this when people hook up/have one night stands, look at porn or get a prostitute. I don't see those things as love, just sex. I know people can express their romantic feelings through sex but those feelings are love, not actions.

[Prisma]

The girl just left the asexual guy because she doesn't think he loves her because he didn't want to have sex. Is this how the sexual population truly view the romantic side of relationships? That if someone doesn't want to have intercourse, then they must not love the other person?

From my experience? Sadly, yes. This is EXACTLY what they think. They also think that if someone is romantically attracted to someone else they're also sexually attracted to them, though they do accept that sexual attraction can come without the romantic attraction.

[pipsuxx]

i guess i have a few points/anecdotes relevant to this topic!

to begin with, this is very much what made me incredibly nervous about accepting my identity as an asexual. i was convinced that without sex i would never find requited love. i knew i was fully capable of romantic love, but i was totally convinced it would be nigh on impossible to find an accepting partner. at this point i was still firmly convinced i was heteroromantic despite strong indications to the contrary (you gotta love how effectively we can be brainwashed into accepting alloheterosexuality and all its trappings as the norm, eh?) and with what girls are led to believe of male sexual appetite i was struggling to see how i could reconcile my own orientation and libido with that of any male!! i now know i was wrong on a lot of counts and that a) there are plenty of allosexual people out there who are willing to accommodate my needs, b) there are plenty of asexual people out there, c) the accepted portrayal of male sexuality is totally overblown, and finally d) i actually quite enjoy dating girls anyway.

i am currently in a relationship with an allosexual lesbian and i know for a fact that we have other older allosexual lesbian friends who know i am asexual and consequently doubt the validity of our relationship because of that. this does hurt and i have called them out at times. they assume firstly that because i'm asexual we have absolutely no sexual contact, which is inaccurate anyway, and secondly that this lack makes the relationship not 'real' or whatever. to be honest it's the second part that bothers me more - how much sexual contact we're having is none of their business, but them thinking they can pass judgement on whether or not we love each other because of how much sex we may or may not be having is really ridiculous.

my sex-repulsion fluctuates a lot and i know this does hurt my girlfriend. she tells me that she understands in her head that it means nothing but instinctively to her, me not wanting to kiss/touch her at times when at others i do is confusing because it's hard for her to separate sexual and romantic attraction. obviously for her, as for most allosexuals, the two orientations align so completely that i can understand it being difficult to tell where one ends and the other begins.

[pittiechick]

My boyfriend is very sexual and he finds sex very emotionally and intimate- and for him it's about connecting on a deeply emotional level (hence why he doesn't just go out and have sex with random people, he needs to feel connected to them). When we don't have sex for a long time (because I don't want to) he starts getting depressed and tries to impress me or gets down on himself, because he thinks it's a reflection of my love for him. Which it absolutely isn't. So yes, some people do perceive it that way. For me I don't need to have sex with him to love him.

[Whispearl]

Love and sex are not the same thing, but to a lot of people, sex is a very important expression of love. I personally don't see it that way, but a lot of people do. As long as the person doesn't do anything bad to their asexual partner or resort to abuse tactics or anything like that, then I think breaking up because of different needs in the relationship is fine. I just wish more people realized that romance can exist without sex, but I guess I can't go around and change what people are.

[Fire & Rain]

I think it truly depends on the person. I have heard several counselors specifically say that sex is the core of a romantic relationship. A great "relationship" without sex is "just" a friendship, to them. And I have seen sexual people incredibly frustrated with their sexual partner if the sex isn't at a frequency and quality to meet their needs. For (sexual) marriages, the 3 issues which cause divorce most often are: money, family and sex.

From that I conclude sex is a core relationship need for sexuals. However, HOW important it is can vary across a broad spectrum. Some sexual partners have such a low sex drive that a high quality relationship with occasional sex is OK. Some sexual partners have a very high sex drive and, for them, an asexual WOULD be someone they would probably end up leaving, because a high priority core need isn't being met for them.

Now, is sex love for sexuals? That's a more interesting question. If you're talking a very sexual, old-fashioned man, often they can only feel emotionally open to their partner when or right after they have sex. And old-fashioned women often flat out intertwine love and sex even more deeply.

Using today's mores? Well, near as I can tell, someone who is sexual would on some level feel something is "missing" or "wrong" if their partner wasn't having sex with them.

I've heard very spiritual sexual people specifically say "Sex is the closest you can ever be with someone on the physical plane." So, to them, the deepest, most loving connection with a person, which lacked sex, would not be complete. They could certainly be close friends and cherish the asexual deeply but romance? No.

So, to summarize, for a sexual person, love does not EQUAL sex, but romantic love INCLUDES sex to some degree. A perfect romantic partner, to a sexual person, is someone with whom they share a deep emotional, intellectual, spiritual and yes, physical connection which includes sex as a core component. Now, HOW important sex is to a particular person? There is absolutely no way to tell without asking the actual person. Basically, sex is a subset of romantic love but not equivalent to it.

I don't think it's reasonable that EVERY sexual person will leave EVERY asexual person, but in the drastically over-simplified world of movies and TV, I don't think most writers are up to the task of showing a complex, nuanced sexual-asexual romantic relationship where the couple communicates to address each person's needs. Many writers barely know asexuals exist, so it's a far way from understanding the nuanced views necessary to avoid a caricature of asexuality.

Look at the way writers portrayed, say, homosexuals in the 1980s movie Mannequin. Granted it was a comedy but the gay character, although portrayed as a good man, was a walking stereotype. It hasn't been until, say, 10 years ago that homosexual characters were portrayed with some real human depth. I expect it to take awhile for asexuals to be portrayed the same way.

I agree with almost everything you said except for one thing. I just wanted to point out that the level of sex drive may play as a factor for some sexuals but not all sexuals with a high sex drive will leave their asexual partners because of sex. It highly depends on how each sexual views a romantic relationship. If a sexual is very traditional (romantic wise), monogamous and if they hold emotional and sensual connections above the sexual one, they are very likely to stay with their asexual partner. I'm speaking this from my own personal experience :) Having a high sex drive doesn't always mean they can't live without sex or think very highly of sex.

[BerenErchamion]

I think it truly depends on the person. I have heard several counselors specifically say that sex is the core of a romantic relationship. A great "relationship" without sex is "just" a friendship, to them.

That's ridiculous. Having sex with someone is no greater of an indication of romantic attraction than hugging is an indication a sexual attraction.

For some people, it is. Your own experience is not necessarily universal; please don't make the mistake of assuming it is.

[iamphoenixfire]

I think it truly depends on the person. I have heard several counselors specifically say that sex is the core of a romantic relationship. A great "relationship" without sex is "just" a friendship, to them.

That's ridiculous. Having sex with someone is no greater of an indication of romantic attraction than hugging is an indication a sexual attraction.

my mom is like that. she told me my year long romantic relationship with someone wasn't real to anyone else because we couldn't be physical.

but yeah, romance and sex... totally separate. they just happen to coincide... a lot.

edit: although actually it may not be as common as i thought. my sister watches this stupid reality show where people try and find their matched significant other. sometimes, between those 2 people, there is just platonic stuff, but not usually. sometimes it's pure romance but no sexual attraction. and other times it's sexual attraction but no romantic attraction. it all just depends.

[Guest]

When I feel overwhelmed by my feelings for someone... when no words suffice, when I feel like my chest is going to, like, collapse... sex is amazing as an emotional emulator. It feels like an expression of all the stuff i can't say because "i love you" is kind of... not strong enough sometimes.

And like Serran, saw the movie and do not think he's asexual, but that's really not super relevant.

[whitesphere]

When I feel overwhelmed by my feelings for someone... when no words suffice, when I feel like my chest is going to, like, collapse... sex is amazing as an emotional emulator. It feels like an expression of all the stuff i can't say because "i love you" is kind of... not strong enough sometimes.

You just reminded me of something very interesting. Some of us place a very high value on words as expressions of emotions. What I've found recently is the deepest, most powerful love transcends any words. It's the kind of love you feel in every cell of your being. Yet it can be as soft as a breeze. So it won't always sweep you away, but it's quietly there, like a still ocean, miles of water quietly supporting you on the surface.

And all of that can be expressed without even saying a word. Even if you don't have sex, a certain smile, a gentle touch, a certain look in the eyes can show it far more than "I love you."

[Guest]

Awwwww. And true.

[Vio]

In my past relationships, I either have been dumped for not wanting sex (they state I must not really love them or do not seem to) or they end up cheating on me. I have hope that I will find someone that loves me for me, not just for my body.

[helana12_03]

Unfortunately, for many sexuals, sex means love and romantic relationships without sex feel incomplete (especially after marriage).

[interpol]

So I'm watching a movie on the TV guide network while doing my homework... (I know, I should do one or the other...) and some movie is on, and the guy IS an asexual. I know, simply because of all the glaringly obvious clues. It's called "The Mirror Has Two Faces"

Anyway, the actual topic:

The girl just left the asexual guy because she doesn't think he loves her because he didn't want to have sex. Is this how the sexual population truly view the romantic side of relationships? That if someone doesn't want to have intercourse, then they must not love the other person?

I think this is absolutely preposterous, and yet, it seems completely logical when attempting to think about it from the other perspective... but it still seems outlandish and rude.

So... I'm just curious to know what anyone else thinks about this sort of thing,

No, the majority wouldn't want to just dump someone because they don't want sex.

That IS rude, and shows the baseness of that person. Some people are just jerks.

[JohnSC]

sex = love is not logical.

They can be independent events, where the occurrence of sex has no effect on the occurrence of love. Vice Versa. Although very often they do occur together.

Senior couples who not longer have sex due to impotence or age but are still very much in love is an example of love without sex.

Prostitution is a classic example of sex existing without love.

[Chardog]

The person I consider my SO is gay. I'm AFAB, so of course he doesn't want to have sex with me.. But he does legitimately love me and realizes that sex and love are two separate things (and has said so straight out).

[Gawizneigs]

I think it truly depends on the person. I have heard several counselors specifically say that sex is the core of a romantic relationship. A great "relationship" without sex is "just" a friendship, to them.

That's ridiculous. Having sex with someone is no greater of an indication of romantic attraction than hugging is an indication a sexual attraction.

For some people, it is. Your own experience is not necessarily universal; please don't make the mistake of assuming it is.

I don't care if some people think sex and romance are always connected. That is an opinion, not a fact, and it does not make it so for all of us. It is possible to have sex without love and love without sex.