Jump to content

A Bond Only Asexuals Can Feel


Georgetown

Recommended Posts

I think that if you have a bond with someone it's going to be its own kind of special thing that only you and that person can feel and only with each other.

If you have a bond with an asexual, and you are asexual, that bond is going to be special and going to have required all those things happen. It's also going to require that you and the other person be the people that you are. You wouldn't have that same bond with anyone else, although you might have a similar one with another person who is also asexual.

I have a pretty special bond with my ace boyfriend, but I also have a pretty special (and different) bond with some sexual exes.

Minimizing other people's sexualities is pretty fucked up, even if you feel like they've done the same to you. It's not something I really want to criticize though, especially when someone is just processing their roles inside a larger space, but I can see where it can be minimizing to demisexuals or aromantics who share this safe space?

minimizing other sexualities isn't really always punching up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchemistress

I didn't really see it as an attack on sexuality, I find it unusual how angry some people got at it.

I'm assuming that this person has just never been in a relationship with an asexual person before and was just really really happy to find a relationship recipricated in a way they felt only an asexual person could reciprioate (aka 100% desire free).

I will admit it did come off as weird and kind of elitest with the whole.. "pure" .. "ethereal" .. " soul-melding gift from god" thing... like what?

And omg no I would not even close to relate romantic love to the love you feel for a parent or sibling. Like bleeeeh. Wow okay I'm the one being rude now I'm sorry but bleeeeehhhhhh. I mean sure it's still lust free but it's not even close to the same imo like bleeeehhh. It's so so so different. Still totally sexual attraction free but sooo soooo different. O-O

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ricecream-man

While I'm disagree with the OP that there's a unique ace-ace bond I think I know why that feeling was there.

It probably stemmed from the fact that for an ace there's a unique level of comfort in knowing that sex isn't in the back of their partner's mind. A relief from that constant pressure whether or not it's founded in any real truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I'm disagree with the OP that there's a unique ace-ace bond I think I know why that feeling was there.

It probably stemmed from the fact that for an ace there's a unique level of comfort in knowing that sex isn't in the back of their partner's mind. A relief from that constant pressure whether or not it's founded in any real truth.

Yeah that's what I feel with my partner.. it's this whole other level just because the 'huge sexy elephant' is not in the room haha..now that I am with an asexual person, the elephant has literally buggered off home to Africa or wherever it is sexy elephants live :P .

It's so freeing knowing I can just be with someone, be intimate, loving, caring, sensual, romantic etc and knowing that nothing I do will ever lead to my partner wanting sex from me. It makes it feel as though this is the deepest romantic bond I have ever had with a person.

Of course for a sexual couple the bond would feel exactly the same (well, whatever their version of the bond is, every couple is different) because that 'elephant' isn't an issue for them.. it's something they both want so it doesn't get in the way of their bond the way it always has for me, as an asexual.. And for sexuals who are in love, what I describe as 'an elephant in the room' can actually be a deeply intimate, loving act that often brings them closer together as a couple and enhances their bond.

I recently went on an amazing date with another asexual, and I'm thoroughly convinced there exists a kind of bond only Asexuals can feel, an emotion and sense desire only psychologically possible when you do not have directed sexual feelings.

It's this very pure ethereal sense of connection, a kind of loving soul-meld

This experience reaffirms why I argue against mixed relationships. When asexuals date, a uniquely awesome fulfilling spiritual bond awaits us, something we can't share with a sexual. They could never understand it, just as we can't truly understand them.

We're all humans, all capable of deep feelings, it's just that sometimes there are things that can get in the way of those feelings (like, things that make us uncomfortable or unhappy or whatever) .. I agree with what everyone else has said here, that these things have nothing to do with sexual orientation (even mixed orientation couples can feel this way of course). And I believe all relationship bonds built on love, trust, respect, honesty etc are 'pure' regardless of whether or not they involve sex.. all bonds are also unique in that no two people are alike, so the bonds we form with each other will always be unique to every individual couple.That's my opinion anyway.

Edit: I just realized my spell-check is not working for some reason, so this comment may have some horrendous spelling errors haha.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And omg no I would not even close to relate romantic love to the love you feel for a parent or sibling. Like bleeeeh. Wow okay I'm the one being rude now I'm sorry but bleeeeehhhhhh. I mean sure it's still lust free but it's not even close to the same imo like bleeeehhh. It's so so so different. Still totally sexual attraction free but sooo soooo different. O-O

Once over the initial infatuation phase, it does actually feel like sibling love to me. You know, like family. Spending time together, talking to each other about everything that's happening in your life, being there for each other, treating the other's problems as important as your own.. Everything I seem to like about "love" appears to be the familial type, not the romantic type.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once over the initial infatuation phase, it does actually feel like sibling love to me. You know, like family. Spending time together, talking to each other about everything that's happening in your life, being there for each other, treating the other's problems as important as your own.. Everything I seem to like about "love" appears to be the familial type, not the romantic type.

Completely agreed.... and in the best case, I'd say the infatuation stage gets altogether skipped and that familial love is all there ever was. Sure happened that way with R. and me.

[... *sigh* R. :( ]

But yeah, romance-repulsed speaking here, so no surprise I agree with your statement. I tend to get uneasy - maybe it's not an outright red flag to me, but it sure is at least a yellow one - when I hear people say their love for a partner is totally unlike that for a sibling. Someone saying that doesn't sound like someone I could ever see myself partnering up with, to be frank. Incompatible with me, and in a somewhat scary way, to boot. :ph34r: For me, the feelings for an ideal partner would be a lot like the ones for a sister (less so as for a parent, but that's due to the power differential between parent and child... I wouldn't tolerate that in a relationship of mine).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand 'familial love'.. I've never felt anything akin to

love for my siblings and it makes me feel deeply uncomfortable to think of them as anything other than strangers that I was forced to live with for 16 years. I actually *like* my partner as a friend, if you take away the romantic love I feel for him then whats left is utterly nothing like what I feel for my siblings lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i understand the gist of your post i do still think any mix could have an amazing relationship, im glad your date went well though :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata

I don't understand 'familial love'.. I've never felt anything akin to

love for my siblings and it makes me feel deeply uncomfortable to think of them as anything other than strangers that I was forced to live with for 16 years. I actually *like* my partner as a friend, if you take away the romantic love I feel for him then whats left is utterly nothing like what I feel for my siblings lol.

I don't get "familial love" either. It seems to imply there's a specific kind of love based on blood relations alone, which I don't experience at all. For me love is always based on friendship. If I love a family member, it's because I see them as a friend as well. In romantic relationships, romantic attraction is added on top of friendship. When I read Tarfeather and Mysticus's posts above, I just mentally substitute "familial love" with "friendly love" (since most people see the two as similar) and it all makes sense to me. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always understood "familial love" as unconditional love (a bond that can't be broken unless in extreme circumstances), going much deeper than ordinary friendships and which lasts a whole life. And for me, the ideal relationship starts with attraction and friendship, and friendship slowly goes deeper and deeper to eventually reach "familial love" ; with time, attraction can still be there but unconditional love is the "core" of the relationship. In fact, I would even say that the unconditional love sustains the attraction so both never fade.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always understood "familial love" as unconditional love (a bond that can't be broken unless in extreme circumstances), going much deeper than ordinary friendships and which lasts a whole life. And for me, the ideal relationship starts with attraction and friendship, and friendship slowly goes deeper and deeper to eventually reach "familial love" ; with time, attraction can still be there but unconditional love is the "core" of the relationship. In fact, I would even say that the unconditional love sustains the attraction so both never fade.

Yeah I definitely don't feel that for my family. My siblings (and dad too I imagine) would throw me under a bridge if it meant saving themselves lol and I certainly wouldn't be going out of my way to do them any favors. I agree with Starry that it's more about that friendship bond than "family love"

..I think it's a certain type of bond and it can happen between any two people, it isn't specifically reserved for family.

Just because siblings for example are blood relations doesn't make that 'bond' any more special or deep than someone else might have for their best friend. Though yeah I do accept the fact that lots of people have this 'special bond' with their sisters or parents or whatever that I will never understand.

I would obviously let myself die to save my kids, but I don't think that's about a special bond or a special kind of love. I think it's just something the evolution has imbedded into (most) parents to ensure the survival of offspring? a willingness to suffer for them etc if it means they are healthy and happy. I truly don't think that's a special kind of love though. I'd have done that (and did do it) for my ex, even though he was a complete arsehole haha. It wasn't about love, I just assumed it was my job to suffer for my ex as he was my partner, just as I *know* it's my job to suffer for my kids no matter what they do (even if they murder someone or whatever)

... I'll be honest for a long time I thought that where they show brothers and sisters hugging etc in movies and saying they love each other , I thought it was fake or some sort of weird fetish the directors had. But since hearing people's stories on AVEN since I joined over a year ago, it actually seems like many people feel that unconditional bond with their siblings and it's *me* and my siblings who are in the minority. haha.

Oh well, each to their own I say. I totally get that people can have a special unconditional bond that couldn't be broken no matter what etc etc, I just don't think it's only reserved for siblings or parents and know many people *never* experience for their own family, though do for a partner or a friend or whatever, so don't think it's even more 'common' amongst blood relations. So I wouldn't call it "familial love" or a "familial bond" .. I'd just call it a soul bond I guess. That's just me personally though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand 'familial love'.. I've never felt anything akin to

love for my siblings and it makes me feel deeply uncomfortable to think of them as anything other than strangers that I was forced to live with for 16 years. I actually *like* my partner as a friend, if you take away the romantic love I feel for him then whats left is utterly nothing like what I feel for my siblings lol.

I don't get "familial love" either. It seems to imply there's a specific kind of love based on blood relations alone, which I don't experience at all. For me love is always based on friendship. If I love a family member, it's because I see them as a friend as well. In romantic relationships, romantic attraction is added on top of friendship. When I read Tarfeather and Mysticus's posts above, I just mentally substitute "familial love" with "friendly love" (since most people see the two as similar) and it all makes sense to me. :D

I just consider "familial love" the same as "platonic love", personally. I don't LOVE a lot of my family, because I don't KNOW a lot of my family. How can I love someone I either do not like (my Uncle, for example) or do not know (roughly 100 people in my family). :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get "familial love" either. It seems to imply there's a specific kind of love based on blood relations alone, which I don't experience at all. For me love is always based on friendship. If I love a family member, it's because I see them as a friend as well. In romantic relationships, romantic attraction is added on top of friendship. When I read Tarfeather and Mysticus's posts above, I just mentally substitute "familial love" with "friendly love" (since most people see the two as similar) and it all makes sense to me. :D

Since I see "friend" pretty much synonymous with "a sibling you picked, instead of being dealt them by fate of birth", I'm fine with your mental substitution. ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always understood "familial love" as unconditional love (a bond that can't be broken unless in extreme circumstances), going much deeper than ordinary friendships and which lasts a whole life. And for me, the ideal relationship starts with attraction and friendship, and friendship slowly goes deeper and deeper to eventually reach "familial love" ; with time, attraction can still be there but unconditional love is the "core" of the relationship. In fact, I would even say that the unconditional love sustains the attraction so both never fade.

Yeah I definitely don't feel that for my family. My siblings (and dad too I imagine) would throw me under a bridge if it meant saving themselves lol and I certainly wouldn't be going out of my way to do them any favors. I agree with Starry that it's more about that friendship bond than "family love"

..I think it's a certain type of bond and it can happen between any two people, it isn't specifically reserved for family.

Just because siblings for example are blood relations doesn't make that 'bond' any more special or deep than someone else might have for their best friend. Though yeah I do accept the fact that lots of people have this 'special bond' with their sisters or parents or whatever that I will never understand.

I would obviously let myself die to save my kids, but I don't think that's about a special bond or a special kind of love. I think it's just something the evolution has imbedded into (most) parents to ensure the survival of offspring? a willingness to suffer for them etc if it means they are healthy and happy. I truly don't think that's a special kind of love though. I'd have done that (and did do it) for my ex, even though he was a complete arsehole haha. It wasn't about love, I just assumed it was my job to suffer for my ex as he was my partner, just as I *know* it's my job to suffer for my kids no matter what they do (even if they murder someone or whatever)

... I'll be honest for a long time I thought that where they show brothers and sisters hugging etc in movies and saying they love each other , I thought it was fake or some sort of weird fetish the directors had. But since hearing people's stories on AVEN since I joined over a year ago, it actually seems like many people feel that unconditional bond with their siblings and it's *me* and my siblings who are in the minority. haha.

Oh well, each to their own I say. I totally get that people can have a special unconditional bond that couldn't be broken no matter what etc etc, I just don't think it's only reserved for siblings or parents and know many people *never* experience for their own family, though do for a partner or a friend or whatever, so don't think it's even more 'common' amongst blood relations. So I wouldn't call it "familial love" or a "familial bond" .. I'd just call it a soul bond I guess. That's just me personally though.

I agree with you on this. I don't see why because 2 or several persons share DNA, they should share more love. But as somebody who didn't really have what I would call a loving and respectful family (I've cut all ties with most of them, because of abuse), I've came to give up the traditional definition of "family" to create my own : a group bound by unconditional love. And with this definition, "family love" takes all its sense.
Link to post
Share on other sites

There really isn't anything such as "unconditional love". Love, whether familial, friend love, or romantic love, can wear out with ill-treatment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

99% unconditional love anyway. I wasn't talking about extreme circumstances.

A simple argument can be enough to lose a friend, but it's not the same thing with love for people considered as family. The bond is much stronger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

99% unconditional love anyway. I wasn't talking about extreme circumstances.

A simple argument can be enough to lose a friend, but it's not the same thing with love for people considered as family. The bond is much stronger.

Eh. An argument has to be pretty severe for me to give up a friend, but a serious enough argument can make me give up family too. I have ZERO issue cutting blood relations out of my life the same as I would a toxic friend. I never got the "they are family, even if you hate them, you still have to love them" thing. So, to some the bond is stronger. To some, like me, the bond is the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it's a cultural difference, because in my country, you could dump your best friend as you want, but don't ever try to cut all ties with your family (especially your mother, you can do that to your father but never to your poor mommy, because even if she's abusive, she still loves you), because everybody would be horrified. If you do that, shame on you, you monster. It's how it works here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
butterscotchwm

(I can see that this thread has gone on to other discussions about love, but I'm just replying to the OP)

I can understand if you think two asexuals can bond over similar experiences, and if they have similar tastes they would not have to worry about having to compromise on sex... And that would be ONE relevant asexual advantage or "perk." But it definitely is elitist if you claim that this sort of "spiritual bond" you feel is exclusive to asexuals and imply that it's better than what sexuals have. (This is what I think you were saying when you said, "This experience reaffirms why I argue against mixed relationships." ) You don't KNOW what sexual people experience. Many of them could be experiencing the same sort of spiritual, euphoric love that you are regardless if they were thinking about having sex with that person or not.... Asexual relationships are in no way better or worse than any other relationships and that's that.

Very poetic though. Interesting read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Argue against mixed relationships? You mean you're actually so pretentious you argue about other people's personal relationships as if you know what makes them happy better than they do? What the hell, man.

It's not because the sexual people you've met see things differently from you that it's the case for all sexual people. And it's not because you see things differently from them that it will also be the case for other asexuals. It's dangerous and prejudiced to put all your eggs in the same basket. I mean, it's the same thing as if you said that all Japanese people like sushi.

But if we're going to play the "everyone is unique" game, what's even the point of having sexual orientations or any of these identities to begin with? There has to be some generalization we can make that lumps us all together besides mere preference in a vacuum. Of course there are exceptions, but there's a reason gays generally don't go out looking for dates in any old bar.

Because finding things you have in common with people doesn't mean assuming everybody with said thing in common is exactly the same. I wouldn't like it if someone was like "so do all asexuals do x?" No because we're different people with different preferences. Finding similarities doesn't mean we should lump ourselves together in other ways as you say. How boring would it be if everybody was the same?

Link to post
Share on other sites
butterscotchwm
I would obviously let myself die to save my kids, but I don't think that's about a special bond or a special kind of love. I think it's just something the evolution has imbedded into (most) parents to ensure the survival of offspring? a willingness to suffer for them etc if it means they are healthy and happy. I truly don't think that's a special kind of love though. I'd have done that (and did do it) for my ex, even though he was a complete arsehole haha. It wasn't about love, I just assumed it was my job to suffer for my ex as he was my partner, just as I *know* it's my job to suffer for my kids no matter what they do (even if they murder someone or whatever)

Sorry I couldn't help but comment on this... Because it reminded me of something my aunt said once.

My sister had this project for her Confirmation class, and she had to go around and ask 10 different people "what it means to love." She was smart and decided to do this while we were having an extended family get together, so she could just ask everyone at once (she also had to video tape them). Everyone pretty much said different things! It was really interesting... Some people were very specific and talked about it as a romantic thing, my grandmother went very broad with her definition and defined a loving person as someone who was "tolerant." My aunt, however, said this: "Love is being consumed with making sure that that person is ok."

For some reason I think hers is my favorite.... And what you described is exactly the reason why.

I think as human beings we are programmed to immediately take action when someone we love isn't ok. Like... if you think about it, if someone you love isn't ok, then how are YOU going to be ok? And if you are a very loving person you might even want to take action, or feel concern, if a stranger (example) suddenly fainted or collapsed in public and you stick around because all you can think is, "Oh my god are they ok?"

In any case, I would consider your impulse to die for your kids to be a type of love in of itself, even if it is "imbedded" into you as a parent/decent person. Because if you could even imagine a parent who wouldn't sacrifice for their child, then you would probably consider them to be a very unloving person in general...

Anyways, I just wanted to throw that out there.

I think people overcomplicate the definition of "love" sometimes, because they think it's supposed to be this amazing, euphoric, emotional, personal bond with a particular person - which IS a type of strong love, don't get me wrong... But love can also be simple. You can just be generally a loving person who just wants to make sure that everyone is ok - especially the ones you have a personal connection with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Touchofinsight

I personally have no problem with anti-sex or elitism. I mean, I'll argue with them about it for sure, but I think they should have a right to present their opinions. And I think I should have the right to argue with them about those opinions.

I agree but it is far too common that communities want to sanitize these ideas out from the community until it fits in agreeably within the narrative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ricecream-man

I personally have no problem with anti-sex or elitism. I mean, I'll argue with them about it for sure, but I think they should have a right to present their opinions. And I think I should have the right to argue with them about those opinions.

I agree but it is far too common that communities want to sanitize these ideas out from the community until it fits in agreeably within the narrative.

But doesn't each member of the community have the right to express their ideas as well? So if the majority disagrees with a subject such as asexual elitism and happens to speak out against it is it really "sanitizing"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would obviously let myself die to save my kids, but I don't think that's about a special bond or a special kind of love. I think it's just something the evolution has imbedded into (most) parents to ensure the survival of offspring? a willingness to suffer for them etc if it means they are healthy and happy. I truly don't think that's a special kind of love though. I'd have done that (and did do it) for my ex, even though he was a complete arsehole haha. It wasn't about love, I just assumed it was my job to suffer for my ex as he was my partner, just as I *know* it's my job to suffer for my kids no matter what they do (even if they murder someone or whatever)

I don't have this at all, actually. But I have a mother who did (does) care about me like this, and the sense of loyalty and trust that developed in that is what I generally understand as "familial love". Basically it means "I'd sacrifice a lot to help this person out", which implies among other things that I'd be okay sharing my finances with them, something that isn't true for just any friend in my case. So yeah, to me it does feel like "love", because it's not something programmed into me, but rather something that I choose because I've made good experiences with that kind of bond.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Touching such a flame, it's warmth lasts a lifetime. Whether real or imaginary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Touchofinsight

But doesn't each member of the community have the right to express their ideas as well? So if the majority disagrees with a subject such as asexual elitism and happens to speak out against it is it really "sanitizing"?

The problem begins when people just want to push them out of the community as a person rather then having an actual discussion. Insults, belittling, condescension etc but this is scoped at more then just this one subject. The desire to silence those who present ideas they aren't comfortable with or find offensive.

However the point you make is true its up to the individuals to speak their minds and the fallout of which is unpredictable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The elitism in OP leaves me disgusted. OP has legitimate issues with their experiences in dating a handful of individual human beings, but it's turned into thread/post after post over the past several weeks of generalizing and divisiveness along the sexual/asexual distinction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem begins when people just want to push them out of the community as a person rather then having an actual discussion. Insults, belittling, condescension etc

The elitism in OP leaves me disgusted.

Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic these two posts follow directly after each other? It's like Prairie went out of their way to illustrate Touchofinsight's point. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem begins when people just want to push them out of the community as a person rather then having an actual discussion. Insults, belittling, condescension etc

The elitism in OP leaves me disgusted.

Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic these two posts follow directly after each other? It's like Prairie went out of their way to illustrate Touchofinsight's point. ;)

But Prairie really isn't talking about the person who made the OP (i.e., not trying to push that person out of the community); they're talking about the elitism they feel the post shows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem begins when people just want to push them out of the community as a person rather then having an actual discussion. Insults, belittling, condescension etc

The elitism in OP leaves me disgusted.

Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic these two posts follow directly after each other? It's like Prairie went out of their way to illustrate Touchofinsight's point. ;)

Could you elaborate on how I want to push Georgetown out of the community as a person and not have a discussion, and where I've insulted, belittled, been condescending? I've reviewed what I've written and from what I've found I've made two posts directly addressing Georgetown, and both I've said similar things, the second more heated than the first.

The aim of both of my messages has been to express what I'm feeling, and suggest ways for Georgetown to better express their personal experience without turning it into what I see as divisive generalizations about sexuals versus asexuals, and men versus women as their posts have done. If someone builds an ideology of humanity around their feelings, it's harder to connect with them and understand what's actually going on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...