Pressure to perform - even for aces?

[everywhere and nowhere]

As in the title - not performing, not being "good in bed", even hypothetically (if, for example, someone is asexual and sexually inactive, buy says that zhe would be able to please a partner in a hypothetical sexual situation), seems so embarassing in our culture that even asexuals seem to be under this pressure. I've noticed it a few times on this forum, first of all in an old topic about the issue if an asexual person would be able to be sexually satisfying for an allosexual partner (I don't remember the exact title). I don't understand it. I'm not ashamed to admit that even if I could bring myself to try sex (which I most likely couldn't), all my theoretical knowledge about sex would most likely be completely unhelpful and I wouldn't know what to do.

Maybe it's another way of saying "so if you have an eye on me, give it up because it would never be satisfying anyway even for you".

[Telecaster68]

It wouldn't be so much about being 'technically' good or bad at sex - abilities, experience, knowledge, even physical ability vary wildly amongst sexuals. It would be about not desiring your partner, which would inevitably come across unless you're a world class actor who can keep it up for years flawlessly. It would be detectable in the same way you can spot someone who's bored in a conversation, or eating when they're not hungry, even if they're trying to pretend otherwise. 

[Pramana]

I can't even figure out how to hug people as a social greeting without it being awkward. I think trying to kiss people would be a clumsy mess, and anything beyond that could only be worse.

[Busrider]

I believe the majority of relationship problems origin from a lack of communication. The following wall of text is BTW also valid inside the workforce: A dwindling percentage of people is gifted with being naturally "good" at any imaginable craft or chore. Unfortunately the percentage of natural teachers / masters / instructors isn't very high either.

After memorizing those facts almost everybody has a chance to become a somewhat pleasurable sight during their struggles with performing in any unknown field: 

• Ask what you are supposed to do.
• Try hard to really understand the instruction; in doubt ask further questions.
• Try to perform and at the faintest hint of doubt: Ask again.

TL/DR: "???" isn't pronounced "yes yes *nodnods*"! 

 

While @Telecaster68 above is surely right; i.e. a perceptible lack of interest in sex beyond learning the ropes will(!) get noticed for sure, it is not very hard to become able to be a pleasing partner, if one wants to do that, for which reason ever.

[viennaguy94]

I think there is a lot of pressure for guys in particular. A lot of girls just lie on their backs and do nothing. Guys are expected to take the lead and do stuff. In addition to that, there is a pressure to stay aroused all the time, which is of course especially tricky if you are ace...

 

I agree with the people who posted before me. You can learn how to become better in bed, and a lot of that learning process depends on good communication with your partner.

[Lord Jade Cross]

Considering how many cases of gay men, especially in marriages, have come up throughout the years, and not even the wifes have been able to tell (unless the guy makes it painfuly obvious), I think aces, at least ones who are not sex repulsed, would have somewhat of a chance to keep up (no pun intended) a sexual lie.

 

Since sex itself is practice, it would be not that much different to something a person may do and be good at it, but still hate it to death.

[Telecaster68]

Generally, I think the wives of gay men do know something is 'off', even if the sex isn't awful. 

 

A big part of sexual interaction is sensing your partner's pleasure and engagement and while that could be faked for one off encounters, especially where the sexual partner isn't bothered whether the other person is actively enjoying it (like with prostitutes), I doubt it could be done convincingly in a long term relationship. Sex isn't just the act - it's looks, touches, remarks at points when it probably just wouldn't occur to asexuals. The absence of those is very telling, even if sexuals initially can't put their fingers on what's missing. 

 

Whenever asexuals say 'well I've been faking it for years and my partner doesn't know' I would put money on their partner knowing something is 'off', even if they don't know the full extent of it. 

[Busrider]

9 hours ago, viennaguy94 said:

there is a pressure to stay aroused all the time, which is of course especially tricky if you are ace...

I wouldn't take that pressure serious. Life isn't a porn clip where actors are either exceptions or doped or mechanically cheating or all at once...

I heard rumors that foreplay tends to be appreciated by the other side? - So why would we have to be aroused during the first 85% of that? 

10 hours ago, viennaguy94 said:

A lot of girls just lie on their backs and do nothing. Guys are expected to take the lead and do stuff.

Once again: It is all about communication. Either pile up & doze off, since laying there and doing nothing is a great activity you really always wanted to join or in case she reminds you that sex was her intension tell her that you are feeling really uncomfortable to have your way with her, while she seems overthinking tomorrow's shopping list and arrange a re-start of the scene, if you consider it helpful.

[swirl_of_blue]

I certainly hope I could become "good at sex". I have skill in some things I don't particularly like, so why would sex be any different? If I end up in a relationship with someone I don't want to have sex with, I feel that I owe them "technically" good sex. I'm sure that becoming proficient in what to do with my body is easier than learning to fake enthusiasm and my own enjoyment, and I would want my partner to get as much out of sex as possible. If I'm not capable enjoying, it's my problem and not my partner's fault.

[Telecaster68]

Quote

I have skill in some things I don't particularly like, so why would sex be any different?

Because it's not just about skill. It's about enthusiasm, and passion, and desire, and sexuals can feel their presence or absence, just as people can sense when someone's faking interest in a conversation, or enthusiasm for food.  And like a conversation, it takes two people enjoying it to make it good. 'Technically bad' sex (eg a two minute missionary quickie) with someone passionate is generally preferable to technically amazing four hour sessions with someone who you know isn't feeling it.

 

Nobody's blaming the asexual for that - in fact most sexuals would very much appreciate the effort, and the asexual's enjoyment on the level of a job well done because they care for their partner goes a long, long way. But not all the way. Desire is the rest.

[swirl_of_blue]

Just now, Telecaster68 said:

Because it's not just about skill. It's about enthusiasm, and passion, and desire, and sexuals can feel their presence or absence, just as people can sense when someone's faking interest in a conversation, or enthusiasm for food.  And like a conversation, it takes two people enjoying it to make it good.

 

Nobody's blaming the asexual for that - in fact most sexuals would very much appreciate the effort, and the asexual's enjoyment on the level of a job well done because they care for their partner goes a long, long way. But not all the way. Desire is the rest.

I find very hard to believe this, because my own experience is completely opposite. I've had sex with men, and never have I heard a word of complaint for not being "passionate" enough, even though all I've done is lie there and "take it". However, if I've tried to actually participate I've gotten negative feedback on my technique to the point I was once kicked out of bed because I was "too loose" (and I was a virgin at the time...), didn't know how to "use those hands", and not willing to do some things. I really felt like if I had more technical skill the rest wouldn't matter. I felt like I needed to be trained to be more skillful and obedient, and was told that I just needed more practice. None of the complaints were about my lack of enthusiasm.

 

Of course it could be that I only have experience of less-than-ideal and unhealthy relationships, but those experiences have made me what I am now.

[Telecaster68]

Quote

it could be that I only have experience of less-than-ideal and unhealthy relationships

I can't comment on the rest of your relationships, but at the very least, if your partner doesn't care that you're clearly not enjoying it, they're selfish. Going by posts in the Allies section on here, r/DeadBedrooms on reddit, and my own experience and conversations offline, I'd say you've been unlucky. Have a look at the last few posts from Dissolved, for instance, who thought he was asexual but has discovered he's in fact sexual.

[Lord Jade Cross]

While I dont have any experience myself, the sex talks I get caught in, whenever the men seem to need to talk about is almost always (like about 98%) this. I never hear them talking about how emotional their partner was in sex. All they talk about is if the girl (in hetero cases) had a great ass, a great pair or if she was willing to go down on him or do anal. But never have I heard the men say, "she made sure I was feeling completely appreaciated" or anything of the sort. Its only when the girls are not giving them sex than they get depressed. And even then, the problem seems to fizzle out once sex is back on the table.

[Lord Jade Cross]

Even gay men seem to follow this pattern. Granted, by comparison, I dont hear the same amount of gay men complaining as straight do, but I have heard them talking the same way when they find a skilled partner rather than an emotional one.

[Telecaster68]

I'm going to take a flyer that your sample group is under about 25, in general? Young men don't tend to talk about their feelings, and are saying that impress their friends with their ability to attract partners and get them to do sexual things. Have you heard things like 'she was totally into it?', or 'I got her off so many times'. That's more like the ball park of how it comes out. They frame it in terms of their own virility, that's all.

 

[Lord Jade Cross]

Actually no. Not all the men fall under a 25 y/o category. Sure the younger ones will feel the need to impress (for whatever reason) but Ive heard 30+ men do the same. Even a group of men around in their 50's, Ive caught talking the same way.

[Telecaster68]

They'll still want to impress their mates. Really, getting your ideas about how sex works from a bunch of guys trying to impress each other is going to tell you more about their group dynamics than their actual sex lives. It's like drawing conclusions about all asexuals from a quick browse of Tumblr.

[Lord Jade Cross]

Thats would be then, the same issue as aces who think all sexuals operate under the "she's/he's hot, must fuck" pattern. It may not be the reality of the situation but if you dont hear about anything where emotions are considered, then,at least empirically, you will be forced (for lack of a more accurate word)  to that same conclusion.

[Telecaster68]

If it doesn't occur to you that you're only getting part of the picture, yes.

 

Other information is out there, primarily from sexuals, but AVEN en masse tends not to believe us when we say things that don't fit with speculation from people who fundamentally don't want anything to do with partnered sex and mostly have no experience of it.

[Lord Jade Cross]

It has actually, and I have lurked around some sex forums as well but I still tend to see the same. Its always about how to make sex better and the focus is about that only. The only time when emotions get mixed are again when sex is lacking. But while sex is on the table, I rarely, if ever stumbled across posts of people talking about how emotionally fulfilling their partner works towards making them feel.

[swirl_of_blue]

3 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

If it doesn't occur to you that you're only getting part of the picture, yes.

 

Other information is out there, primarily from sexuals, but AVEN en masse tends not to believe us when we say things that don't fit with speculation from people who fundamentally don't want anything to do with partnered sex and mostly have no experience of it.

I think a big factor in this is that those aces/graces/whatever who have had sex probably have on average more negative sex experiences that sexuals. And if you have a lot of negative experiences, it is easier to understand the negative experiences that others have had. And since the media portrayal of sex is very performance centered, the assumption that sex is about technique and not feelings and enthusiasm becomes even stronger.

[Telecaster68]

Quote

The only time when emotions get mixed are again when sex is lacking. But while sex is on the table, I rarely, if ever stumbled across posts of people talking about how emotionally fulfilling their partner works towards making them feel.

I didn't actually say it was emotionally fulfilling, just part of good sex. For most sexuals, a partner laying their inertly would just be bad sex.

 

 

[Lord Jade Cross]

2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I didn't actually say it was emotionally fulfilling, just part of good sex. For most sexuals, a partner laying their inertly would just be bad sex.

 

 

Wait, Im confused. If its not about emotional fulfilment, whats the point of arguing over the lack of enthusiasm in sex?

[ArcticFoxes]

5 minutes ago, Jade Cross said:

Wait, Im confused. If its not about emotional fulfilment, whats the point of arguing over the lack of enthusiasm in sex?

Because it's about all of it. Physical pleasure, emotional fulfillment, theyre all different parts of what can make "good" sex. Ideally you'd want both of those boxes ticked. But even having one box ticked can make for satisfying sex.

[Lord Jade Cross]

So then why all the constant complaints about sex not being good enough with just the physical performance if then its going to get turned around and said that it is about physical performance?

[Telecaster68]

To clarify: Enthusiasm for sex is pretty much a given for sexuals, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's there's some deep, emotional bond. It's just that the person is really into it. But to the extent enthusiasm is an emotion, then yes it is emotional.

 

On the other hand if one person is laying there inertly, it pretty much takes the joy out of it, so unenthusiastic sex is generally more negative than merely enthusiastic sex is positive. To use the conversation analogy - if you meet up with a friend for a chat in the pub, and they're monosyllabic and unengaged, you'd probably be more sad than you would've been cheered by having a perfectly normal conversation with them. You'd be thinking 'why did they bother coming out?'. You're also really unlikely to criticise their conversational skills, and be more likely to ask what's wrong.

[Telecaster68]

1 minute ago, Jade Cross said:

So then why all the constant complaints about sex not being good enough with just the physical performance if then its going to get turned around and said that it is about physical performance?

It's about both, and with sexual people, different encounters tend to have different combinations, even between the same partners. A partner who wasn't technically skilled in any way would be as unsatisfactory as a partner who was never enthusiastic. A partner who was technically skilled but never into it would be okay but the enthusiasm and connection would be missing. A partner who was really into it but terrible technically would be bonding and emotional but never physically amazing. Generally any given sexual encounter will have varying amounts of technical vs emotional pleasure, but a partner who was devoid of one or the other completely would eventually lead to sex being less and less worth bothering with.

 

But as this plays out, if there was someone who was technically crap, but wanted sex for the emotional closeness - ie they had their own innate reasons - would learn to technical skillz (which is in fact what I think most sexual people do) because they enjoyed the pay off as well as the physical pleasure. If someone's just treating sex as a skillset to be learned, I'd think they'd have no particular pleasure in continuing to learn (which is probably where the 'my sexual partner keeps wanting to do different things' complaint from asexuals comes from).

[Lord Jade Cross]

But isnt that a vicious cycle? If theres no enthusiasm, the sex is bad. If there is no sex, then the situation is bad. But then enthusiasm is only optional?

[Telecaster68]

1 minute ago, Jade Cross said:

But isnt that a vicious cycle? If theres no enthusiasm, the sex is bad. If there is no sex, then the situation is bad. But then enthusiasm is only optional?

No, it's not really optional. That's been my point.

[Lord Jade Cross]

Hang on Im going to re-read all this because Im still lost.