Confused by Cupiosexuality (Again)

[Star Bit]

Yah, people do seem to be able to understand Cupio easier when you use the romantic end to explain it.

@StarBit: But about desire because of enjoyment? Where does that fall? If you enjoy chocolate and so therefore decide you want chocolate, doesn't that fall under the "desire" definition? (Starting to wonder if I am cupiosexual. I want sexual contact in a relationship because I enjoy it-mainly the emotional connection, but it still counts as "enjoying"- so wouldn't that mean I desire a sexual realationship? When outside of a relationship I have no desire for a sexual relationship, but sexual contact is something I want when in a relationship, due to the emotional connection.....or is it that since it's the emotional connect that I primarily want, I actually have a desire for emotional connection and not a sexual relationship? If the emotional connect could be gotten through any other activity, I'd be completely sex-indifferent, having it only if my partner wanted, but not really caring either way.)

Yah, you may not desire it for the typical reasons but you still desire it. So you wouldn't be desiring to eat chocolate for the typical reason; that it tastes good, but because of the positive affects it has on the brain. You're also not opposed to its taste but still don't desire it in that specific way. So it's just different but still desire. (yes, what i said isn't exactly the same analogy you used but you still get the point) Enjoyment and desire can be apart and they can be together. In your case they are together but the desire is for a different reason then the majority of people.

You certainly seem to want the emotional connection produced by it, but if that's from sex then you do technically desire sex. If you end up finding a way that releases as much oxytocin as sex, then great, but for the time being that seems to be the only way to get your fix lol. You can certainly change your orientation whenever you feel doing so is accurate.

There are several reasons someone can desire sex that's not just impulse. All the reasons an asexual can enjoy sex actually, but they also have desire with that. They can really love making their partner sexually happy, and in that way they may feel emotional gratification stronger than anything else in a relationship; and thus they desire sexual relationships. They can also prefer it to masturbation and desire sexual relationships out of better pleasure. In those ways they are Cupiosexual. What makes them so is that they pursue sexual relationships. And actually, sex produces the strongest amount of oxytocin; the bonding hormone, and for some people their body can't release it to that degree any other way. So that may explain your situation.

[Autumn Season]

This thought process is just me being picky, so it is not important to read:

Maybe chocolate is not a good example. After all it is a product people invented thousands of years after the appearance of humans on this planet and many more years after the appearance of animals. There was no co-evolution, so there is no reason for us to feel attraction to chocolate before we have tasted it. It is different with veggies, fruits and meat: We are designed to want to eat it before we even know the taste. (I think, might be wrong.)

It is understandable that many want chocolate after knowing the taste: It is sweet and thus activates the reward center in the brain, which makes people want more.

When it comes to an apple, it looks appetizing. When it comes to cooked meat, it smells appetizing. (Not sure about raw meat, though theoretically we should by nature want to eat it, too.)

So my point is that when it comes to sexualities it's more logical to make examples with food we feel an attraction (to eat) towards, before even knowing the taste. :o

[dissolved]

I think that once you pick apart desire, just like picking apart anything really (seems to be all we do on AVEN :P) it doesn't quite lose meaning but... something. I can't think of the word I want to use.

A few months ago, I thought cupio was wanting (just for example) a sexual relationship for say, bonding with your partner, the enjoyment of it etc (or exercise haha :D) but with this no attraction business... And although Star Bit and folk are kinda confirming it, I think that's where I don't quite understand, because a lot of people I know get into sexual relationships for all manner of reasons but never had that sexual attraction element. I personally think branding those folks as cupio is a bit daft. I mean, yeah, for some of them, they probably desire sex on some level which does separate them from some folk on here who really are indifferent to it all... I just think it's mostly unnecessary. I'm not saying it's invalid, but it's totally fine to wait around for someone attractive, and in the meantime have relationships with those who aren't attractive. It doesn't need a word because... that seems like a pretty average human experience to me. I dunno. I can only go on what I know from other people, right? It's fun to learn :D

Ok so. If someone says "I enjoy and desire a sexual relationship for reasons B, C and D, but not A", I just want to raise an eyebrow and say, eh?? The bottom line is, you want that kind of relationship on whatever level, whether you're making a conscious decision or it's primal, innate or whatever you want to call it. I don't think they need to be teased apart. Like with Autumn's food analogy, I would eat stuff purely on a visual basis or whatever, but there's nothing impulsive about it. Does that make me cupio in regards to food?? :P :D

[Telecaster68]

I guess when you're desperate to understand something, dissecting it seems a good place to start.

Trouble is, taking a butterfly to pieces doesn't actually tell you much about why it's so wonderful to watch.

[binary suns]

To me, it's confusing because it seems inherently contradictory. It's saying cupiosexuals want sex - as sexuals do - for emotional and physical pleasure - as sexuals do - yet *they're still not sexual*.

If there's an romantic, emotional component, then it must relate to a specific person who cupios want to have sex with as part of that relationship. How is that not sexual desire for a partner? How is that not being a sexual?

Précisément. Exactly my issue with the cupio thing. Couldn't have said it better myself.

But anyway, have none of you ever heard someone say, I really want someone right now but I don't find anyone attractive?? I hear it repeatedly from my single friends because they don't want to settle for just anyone, they want to be with someone they find attractive. One of my friends has been single for eight years because he hasn't found anyone attractive. That doesn't make him asexual or cupiosexual or anything like that. It makes him human.

Wanting a sexual relationship, wanting a connection with someone "but finding no one attractive/enticing etc" is exactly what sexual folk experience. There's absolutely no difference, other than people deciding they want to be different from the rest of the world. What's so bad about being sexual that people feel a need to conjure up a new label in order for them to make a distinction? There is no distinction. There's variation between humans. Everyone experiences things at different times and frequencies, with different intensity and you know what? That's totally fine and there's no need for these little groups and subgroups of people who consider themselves different! We're all human and we really don't need any more segregation, self proclaimed or otherwise.

my thoughts as well. cupiosexual existing as a label does make sense to me because, there are non-emotional reasons to desire sexual contact. maybe someone has healthily decided they need to fit in with their culture and want a heteronormative relationship despite not being so.

but wanting a sexual relationship but not finding anyone attractive? that by its description doesn't convince me either way towards ace or sexual or demi or whatever. it could validly be any orientation, more info is needed. our attraction is not so simply defined that we make boxes like that pizza box folder and then call it a night. we have labels that mean something, but to know for sure what words best describe someone's experience is a journey that has no precise end. it's like one of those math patterns that if you zoom in on the edge more complexity emerges.

[dissolved]

I dunno... people are interesting and this is an interesting topic but... pfft. I can't help but wonder if it's a way to "escape" being sexual, 'tis all.

[Telecaster68]

Careful. That there's fighting talk round here...

[binary suns]

edit I think I quoted the wrong post? IDK :(

I don't think being what someone might call 'cupiosexual' is a bad thing. I do think it's a pointless, contradictory, confusing term though.

with the terms like cupiosexual and demisexual, I actually don't think they fall necessarily on asexual or sexual or some specific place in between. I think there are people who validly call themselves sexual, that with the right argument sound demi or something, and there are people who can validly say they're asexual who could similarly with the right point of view call themselves demi. sexuality really isn't a small set of things that all people of a certain relationship share in common. attraction isn't a singularly describable experience either. isn't there some sort of saying that meaning is lost in the detail or something? that the closer you look at anything, the more it's just a garbled meaningless image. and anyway, the more you know about a topic, the more you know you don't know. the whole idea that some human emotion is categorically definable is a ridiculous idea. emotions could be a major in college if a culture was so inclined. why do we have to feel like if things start to contradict that suddenly everything is stupid? why do we adhere to the notion that we need only define this once and never question our assumptions again? knowledge is not fact. fact isn't even fact sometimes.

[binary suns]

This thought process is just me being picky, so it is not important to read:

Maybe chocolate is not a good example. After all it is a product people invented thousands of years after the appearance of humans on this planet and many more years after the appearance of animals. There was no co-evolution, so there is no reason for us to feel attraction to chocolate before we have tasted it. It is different with veggies, fruits and meat: We are designed to want to eat it before we even know the taste. (I think, might be wrong.)

It is understandable that many want chocolate after knowing the taste: It is sweet and thus activates the reward center in the brain, which makes people want more.

When it comes to an apple, it looks appetizing. When it comes to cooked meat, it smells appetizing. (Not sure about raw meat, though theoretically we should by nature want to eat it, too.)

So my point is that when it comes to sexualities it's more logical to make examples with food we feel an attraction (to eat) towards, before even knowing the taste. :o

maybe actually chocolate is perfect then :o I mean wanting sex after you taste it but not before sounds like the perfect example of what cupio might describe CX I've always seen the trend to say that, a person doesn't need to have sex to know what their orientation is. so if someone knows they're asexual but after having sex is like, hey I'd do this more, sounds to me like the label cupiosexual fits!

[binary suns]

I dunno... people are interesting and this is an interesting topic but... pfft. I can't help but wonder if it's a way to "escape" being sexual, 'tis all.

so what? why do people have to be precise robots :p the only natural meaning in life is to keep living. we all find our own way to mean something to ourselves, so if someone needs to not be sexual to be meaningful, is that really so bad :D

[dissolved]

I dunno... people are interesting and this is an interesting topic but... pfft. I can't help but wonder if it's a way to "escape" being sexual, 'tis all.

so what? why do people have to be precise robots :p the only natural meaning in life is to keep living. we all find our own way to mean something to ourselves, so if someone needs to not be sexual to be meaningful, is that really so bad :D

I think it's denying oneself...

Despite AVEN saying, "elitism is bad, mkay" I've seen a lot of posts where the people don't seem to want to be sexual... for what reason I have absolutely no idea, but they seem to cling on to some other label rather than accept the possibility that they're like the majority of the world. Not only do they then convince themselves that they're asexual, but apply it to their behaviour, and deny everything that happens to them that is remotely sexual in nature. I find it sad, that people are willing to deny themselves for the sake of a label and a place in the AVEN ranks. I just don't see what's so bad about being sexual... Also! There was even a status update that I read that was along the lines of "guess I'm not asexual after all :(" and then something about wanting to be "pure"... I dunno, but it wasn't the first case and it certainly won't be the last.

But each to their own I guess...

Careful. That there's fighting talk round here...

Just my opinion :P I'm certainly not saying everyone is doing it, but... Oh I dunno. Why not try to experience every possible thing? Life is short and shitty. Maybe it takes a little while for some folk to realise that.

[binary suns]

I think it's denying oneself...?

if one is oneself by denying oneself, do they really deny themself? :D

[dissolved]

I think it's denying oneself...?

if one is oneself by denying oneself, do they really deny themself? :D

I would consider convincing oneself to be something one is in fact not, for the sake of avoiding being in the majority because it's not "pure", to be denying oneself, yeah.

It's just my opinion... I honestly don't care what people do, they're clearly free to whatever it is that floats their little boats... :D

[binary suns]

I think it's denying oneself...?

if one is oneself by denying oneself, do they really deny themself? :D

I would consider convincing oneself to be something one is in fact not, for the sake of avoiding being in the majority because it's not "pure", to be denying oneself, yeah.

It's just my opinion... I honestly don't care what people do, they're clearly free to whatever it is that floats their little boats... :D

well I'm all for floating on :D

[El-not-so-ace]

well I'm all for floating on :D

(I'm really sorry if this is a bit off topic...)

Well, if I can offer a little insight on my situation as I'm in the midst of a lot of introspection right now. Having called myself an asexual felt right. It also made me think that I wasn't broken. This term kept me happt for a couple years.

Then, a crush had thrown me on a loop and I started wondering if I was a demi or allosexual (albeit super anxious and low self-confident one). Having been dealing with my fears and all, I'm hesitating on accepting this even if the clues are piling up. Why? Because once again I see myself as having something to fix about myself. If I'm just a messed-up sexual, I don't have my ace safety net to protect my self-confidence.

Anyway, sorry about going off topic. I'm still a bit confused about what a cupiosexual's really supposed to be in practice. xD