Pamcakes Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 I like the concept of the 'ethical slut', as described by TV Tropes. P. Link to post Share on other sites
Trolley Girl Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 They aren't bad people. If someone's honest, and both people know exactly that sex is all that's going to happen, I don't see a problem with it. As long as they get the pleasure they want, then good for them. As long as it's the sort of pleasure they want, I shall NEVER hold it against any of them. EVER. Link to post Share on other sites
JAG Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 I too, would consider myself an aromantic sexual. While I definitely do not think the idea that aromantic sexuals are "sex-crazed heartless people" (no one's words, just a laughable interpretation), I do think there is some merit to what has been discussed through our perceptions. It's easy to assume that someone who isn't romantically attracted to people, could only be capable of one-night stands, and ignoring the calls for a date. For me, I just don't desire the romantic aspects of a relationship - but the friendship component, someone to trust, and the sex do matter. I think all of those can still form the foundations of a relationship. I consider romantic aspects cuddling, kissing, holding hands, a longing for the individual when there is distance; and I don't think I'll experience the "butterflies in my stomach" effect over anyone. So I can still care about someone, and be in a relationship with them, and maybe even do some of the above romantic things if that is something they desire - I just don't desire it. Link to post Share on other sites
Trolley Girl Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 For me, I just don't desire the romantic aspects of a relationship - but the friendship component, someone to trust, and the sex do matter. I think all of those can still form the foundations of a relationship. I consider romantic aspects cuddling, kissing, holding hands, a longing for the individual when there is distance; and I don't think I'll experience the "butterflies in my stomach" effect over anyone. So I can still care about someone, and be in a relationship with them, and maybe even do some of the above romantic things if that is something they desire - I just don't desire it. This is definitely a very valid outlook, JAG. I must say I am very impressed. As long as you know what you desire and what you don't desire, you're golden. And the fact that you know how flexible you can be with regards to the said romantic things on top of that is what makes a truly honest person. On me: Link to post Share on other sites
JAG Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 This is definitely a very valid outlook, JAG. I must say I am very impressed. As long as you know what you desire and what you don't desire, you're golden. And the fact that you know how flexible you can be with regards to the said romantic things on top of that is what makes a truly honest person. On me: Thanks! I think the reason I'm able to be so clear about this is that I've probably always known all this about me, now I just found one easy word to describe it all. Link to post Share on other sites
Trolley Girl Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Thanks! I think the reason I'm able to be so clear about this is that I've probably always known all this about me, now I just found one easy word to describe it all. Hey, live it up, dude! 8) It's great that you've known yourself as such for so long, and that you know that there is nothing wrong with it. Link to post Share on other sites
Hot_Air_Balloons Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 I'm sure there are plenty. But I never thought of them being the people who slept around. I thought of them as being those who stayed single/ possibly celebrate because they just don't want a relationship. I assume they are fine on their own. Even if they may experience attraction. I've know of a lot of single people in my family who seemed fine with it, but they probably weren't all asexual. Link to post Share on other sites
Changed773 Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Aromantic here. I've been seriously considering getting into a sexual relationship with someone. Hm...maybe not even a relationship, but just a mutual understanding of...sex. I'm an asexual fetishist who has never explored her fetish with another person. I would need to trust my partner (if I had a partner) GREATLY if we were ever to move forward with my fetish. I think that this, in itself, is an emotional connection with another person. Just because I despise kissing, cuddling, pet-names, baby-talk, and missionary traditional "love-making" doesn't mean I would not care about the person I'd be having sex with. I don't see sex as love, though, but wouldn't feel guilty or horrible if we were both in agreement of what to expect from the sex or life outside bedroom. To me, If I acted out my fetish with another person, I would see it as a huge sign of trust. Probably not love, definitely not romance...but an emotional connection that most people wouldn't understand. Hm...just watch "Secretary." That movie can explain it better than I can :lol: Link to post Share on other sites
isitso Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if there were more sexual aromantics in the world than asexual romantics. Link to post Share on other sites
Alex..y Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 After reading the OP I immediately though of the "friends with benefit" relationship. Doesn't it seem to fit? Takes care of the sexual side and leaves the romantic one well alone. :lol: Though, to be fair, I suppose this kind of relationship works better when it involves people who think alike, i.e. two (or more) aromantic sexuals, no? this. I mean, it doesn't have to be horrifying. "friends with benefits" sounds about right. not fluffy mushy romance but a good friend (whom you may or may not have sex if you want to) Link to post Share on other sites
ily Posted November 29, 2010 Share Posted November 29, 2010 To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if there were more sexual aromantics in the world than asexual romantics. That wouldn't surprise me at all, considering how many more non-asexuals there are. Link to post Share on other sites
Trolley Girl Posted November 29, 2010 Share Posted November 29, 2010 To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if there were more sexual aromantics in the world than asexual romantics. That wouldn't surprise me at all, considering how many more non-asexuals there are. It definitely wouldn't surprise me either. Link to post Share on other sites
JAG Posted November 29, 2010 Share Posted November 29, 2010 To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if there were more sexual aromantics in the world than asexual romantics. That wouldn't surprise me at all, considering how many more non-asexuals there are. It definitely wouldn't surprise me either. It would only surprise me that people admitted it... I feel like there's SUCH a fixation on romance that many have a tough time separating what they think they desire and what they actually desire. Link to post Share on other sites
Trolley Girl Posted November 29, 2010 Share Posted November 29, 2010 It would only surprise me that people admitted it... I feel like there's SUCH a fixation on romance that many have a tough time separating what they think they desire and what they actually desire. Good point, JAG. I've known quite a few people who cannot fathom the idea of performing the act without there being any romance involved beforehand, and yet I hear of so many people doing the one-night stand business all the time, but never will they admit that they're not actually looking for romance. Link to post Share on other sites
snipercat Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I don't even care if this was 3 or 4 years ago. I am actually outraged at some of the things I just read. I am an aromantic heterosexual and I don't think myself or any of my fellow sexual aromantics would appreciate what some of you have said. For starters, I don't hurt peoples feeling ever. They know I'm only in it for sex and nothing more, so the comment we are "sleazebags" is just down right rude. Also, I do not go around criticising asexuals for not participating in sexual acts. Why? Because that's the way they are and what makes them happy. It would be judgemental and hippocritical to criticise someone for doing something they enjoy or abstaining from things they do not. And so the fact I enjoy sex and the idea of any romantic or emotional connection repulses me should not be judged by anyone. I don't criticise you for being romantic and/or asexual, so reciprocate that. I see people cuddling and holding hands and kissing. This all repulses me but I don't feel the need to go up to them and tell them to stop doing what they're doing because its disgusting. Just remember, people who get involved with me and no doubt other aromantic sexuals, always let people know they will never have anything more than just sex from me. Link to post Share on other sites
. . .but there are sounds Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 This thread was moved from Asexual Musings and Rantings to Romantic and Aromantic Orientations Locking for necromancy. Please check the data of the last post when posting a thread beyond the second page. If it is older than three months please only revive it if it is a really general topic. If it is older than six months, it is probably best to just start a new topic unless you are the OP of the thread. If it is older than a year, even if you are the OP, its probably best to start a new thread. Otherwise, if you really want to connect with the content of an older thread, consider linking to it in the OP of a new thread or even just describing the old thread. Thank you, . . .but there are sounds, Asexual Musings and Rantings Moderator Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.