Jump to content

Any other Asexuals interested in sex with people?


purplemutant

Recommended Posts

purplemutant

I

What is the difference between masturbation and sex?

This is the actual definition we should be trying to define, not the OP as a person.

Does a circle jerk of men make everyone gay?

Masturbation = one person stimulation themselves alone; sex = genital interaction with another person.

The original poster opened a dialogue about these terms and about their own experiences. And what happened? Immediately and rapidly the conversation became burdened with choosing the appropriate shorthand, the appropriate label.

So many aspects of humanity are on a spectrum, not a set of disjointed points. When people so vehemently argue that there are discrete points, that does little to create the understanding of a spectrum and will cause the same types of harm that embracing a binary understanding does.

Thank you! Part of the reason for starting this thread is to help me sort things out. Maybe asexual isn't the right label for me; but it's what I have been most comfortable with lately. We can go round and round on the definition of asexual and sexual attraction and still not agree. It's the true Scotsman thing. "Asexuals have no interest in sex", "But I have an interest in sex", "True asexuals have no interest in sex". Ultimately I am not sure how much it matters if I am really asexual or not. My sexual orientation is what it is regardless of what label you stick on it. Despite the emotional pain and real tears some of the responses have caused me; this thread has been helpful to me. It seems that my chances of getting what I want from real people is pretty low. So an artificial sex partner might be something to seriously consider. I like term Artificial Human Companion coined by Anton LaVey. As far as I can tell the RealDoll is state of the art in Artificial Human Companions. At least in regards to what's available to the general public. Unfortunately they aren't cheap. I don't have $5499 laying around to buy something like that. And that's just the starting price! :o So for the time being I will have to stick with masturbation. What I can do however is invest in some good sex toys. I can also try some DIY AHC options. Anton LaVey experimented with mannequins. That's an option. Of course since I live with my parents at the moment, experimenting with DIY sex dolls would be easier said than done. I don't need my mom wondering what the heck kind of project I am working on that involves mannequins.

Looking at the RealDoll site got me wondering about something. Asexuality is a lack of sexual attraction; but is that sexual attraction in general or just sexual attraction to people? The photos of the dolls turned me on. But if it were a real person in the photos it probably wouldn't have done much of anything for me. They make RealDolls modeled after real life porn stars. I bet one of those dolls would turn me on but a porn video with the real porn star probably wouldn't. There is also the question of attraction VS desire. If a doll turns me on sexually, is that sexual desire or sexual attraction or what? If we define asexuality is as no (or almost no) sexual attraction to people; then I fit the bill. If it's sexual attraction in general without regard to who or what it's directed at; then I might not qualify as asexual. In regards to dolls I came across the term Agalmatophilia; which wikipedia defines as "

a paraphilia involving sexual attraction to a statue, doll, mannequin or other similar figurative object.". Of course that's a paraphilia not a sexual orientation. It seems that sexual orientation is specifically in reference to people. So in that case it may be correct to state that my sexual orientation is asexual since I am not sexually attracted to people.

On another note; I had been thinking of attending an asexual meet up around here. I only have two friends and they both live out of state. So I thought it might be nice to meet some people and maybe make a friend. But I wonder if going to an asexual meet up is a good idea. If the people around here as welcoming and open minded as some of the people who posted on this thread; then perhaps I should look for friends somewhere else.

Thanks again everyone for the replies (even the hurtful ones).

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the true Scotsman thing. "Asexuals have no interest in sex", "But I have an interest in sex", "True asexuals have no interest in sex".

I believe this particular bit is a misunderstanding of what other posters were trying to say.

Asexuals can be interested in sex for their own curiosity; however, it's an entirely different thing to say "I want to have sexual activity that involves other people." From my own observation, it's not a question of being a "true" asexual since asexual elitism is highly discouraged here, but it's obvious that the vast majority of asexuals are not driven to have partnered sexual activity. It might be something that they muse about (or even try if the opportunity presents itself) but it's definitively not something that they feel needs to be done.

Just based on your posts, it appears that you are driven, in some shape or form, to have sexual activities with other people. Again, based on what you've said, it also appears that it's more than just a curiosity and that there's something intrinsically tied to partner sexual activity that attracts you and makes you want to have it. As some other posters have said, this is a characteristic that contradicts the vast majority of asexual AVENites here. In my own opinion, I think it would help to keep your eyes open a little longer and avoid getting too attached to labels too quickly.

Ultimately, labels are there to guide you. They shouldn't limit your identity, experiences nor how you see yourself. :cake:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are going to talk about wanting to fuck other asexuals at the meet-up, you should definitely avoid going to one because that feels predatory for some people. Other asexuals go to ace meetups to meet other people who have no interest in seeking partnered sexual relations (that's one of the reasons) so having someone there saying they are looking for asexuals to fuck will make people extremely uncomfortable and possibly put them off future meetups which wouldn't be fair. It's hard enough finding asexuals in the real world (people with no interest in seeking partnered sex) without being put off by someone going to an ace meet-up in the hopes of finding asexual people to fuck.

Why not arrange your own own meet up of "asexuals who want to fuck each other" if it's that important to you.. there seem to actually be a few people here keen on that idea (as they keep vehemently agreeing with you and thanking you for this thread lol) so maybe you'll all hit it off together? You wouldn't be allowed to do that on AVEN though, AVEN is a place to learn about asexuality, not a place to advertise that one is looking for fuck buddies. I also wouldn't recommend doing it on FetLife, because although there are ace groups there, they'd all be pretty offended by this also.. they are non-sexual fetishists, which is different from wanting to fuck randoms because (as non-sexual implies) their fetishes in general are non-sexual.

However, as has been mentioned plenty of times in this thread already, there are entire websites online consisting of people just looking for no-strings attached sex. A lot of people on these sites will specify things like "don't want to know your name or anything about your life, just want to meet and fuck you and never see you again" .. again, Craigslist would be good for that I imagine. And hey, it's legal (as long as it's all safe and consensual) and free, aside from the cost of travel and a motel room etc.

If you are turned-on by sex dolls that look like porn stars (I've seen them and they are definitely extremely sexualized looking) maybe you are one of those people who strongly desire sex with non-conscious human-looking things, over sex with humans who actually have a consciousness (I don't mean comatose fetish, I mean these people are actually turned-off my human consciousness). I can't remember what they are called, but I watched a documentary about people like that.. they only have sexual relationships with dolls and have no interest in sex with real people (for numerous reasons, but mainly because human consciousness is a turn-off for them from what I was gathering from the doco) .. they wish (like you mentioned) that sex-cyborgs/robots were available because that'd be even better than a RealDoll, but at the time of the documentary no one was able to make a realistic enough robot for people to be interested in it. I don't think these people are asexual.. they do want sex with people but prefer the dolls because of their lack of human consciousness. Like I mentioned already, I think they have a special name that they call themselves, maybe it's just "doll-fetishist" or something.

EDIT: I'll just point out that I have two female friends from AVEN who are now expressing trepidation at the idea of asexual meetups after seeing this thread, not having realized that there were AVENites who identify as asexual who are actually actively seeking sex with other asexuals. The support the OP has received in this thread shows that there are possibly more people like this than just the OP, so I can see where their concern is coming from. I don't know a lot of people well on AVEN, so if two of the only people I know well are feeling this way after seeing this (given the amount of members there are on AVEN) then there are guaranteed to be others who will feel this way after reading this thread. So cheers for making this so uncomfortable now for people who identify as ace because they (like most aces) have no innate desire to seek partnered sex and were hoping that ace-meets were a safe place to meet people who won't look at them like sex objects.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

If you are going to talk about wanting to fuck other asexuals at the meet-up, you should definitely avoid going to one because that feels predatory for some people. Other asexuals go to ace meetups to meet other people who have no interest in seeking partnered sexual relations (that's one of the reasons) so having someone there saying they are looking for asexuals to fuck will make people extremely uncomfortable and possibly put them off future meetups which wouldn't be fair. It's hard enough finding asexuals in the real world (people with no interest in seeking partnered sex) without being put off by someone going to an ace meet-up in the hopes of finding asexual people to fuck.

My thought was to go to a meetup to possibly make some friends; not friends with benefits. I am well aware that most asexuals aren't interested in sex. I guess I am not explaining things well enough. You make it seem like sex rules my life; it doesn't. If I could go the rest of my life without having sex I would be just fine. My interest in sex with people is simply because there are things I would like to try that necessitate the involvement of people. Even if I can do things my self, it's nice when someone else does the work. I can get a back scratcher and and scratch my own back; but it's nice if someone else does the scratching. I mentioned sex with asexuals because I figure it would be more comfortable to have sex with someone who's sexual orientation is the same (or similar) to mine. Of course their sexual desire would also have to be the same (or similar) to mine. I wouldn't want to have sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex; I am not a rapist.

EDIT: I'll just point out that I have two female friends from AVEN who are now expressing trepidation at the idea of asexual meetups after seeing this thread, not having realized that there were AVENites who identify as asexual who are actually actively seeking sex with other asexuals. The support the OP has received in this thread shows that there are possibly more people like this than just the OP, so I can see where their concern is coming from. I don't know a lot of people well on AVEN, so if two of the only people I know well are feeling this way after seeing this (given the amount of members there are on AVEN) then there are guaranteed to be others who will feel this way after reading this thread. So cheers for making this so uncomfortable now for people who identify as ace because they (like most aces) have no innate desire to seek partnered sex and were hoping that ace-meets were a safe place to meet people who won't look at them like sex objects.

I apologize for making anyone uncomfortable. I feel bad that people are turned off on gong to meetups because of my thread. I hope the people you mentioned don't shy away from meetups forever. The reality is that there is always some degree of risk when meeting people in the real world. Anyone can show up at a meetup. You can only assume everyone there is has the same (or similar) intent as you.

I can't speak for anyone else but I am not "actively seeking sex with other asexuals". I am not actively seeing sex with anyone. Sex just happens to be something I am interested in. But it's not something I invest tons of time on. This thread represents more time I have devoted to this subject than in the recent past. It would be really awesome if the right sex partner just happened to come my way. But that's not likely to happen, given my limited interactions with people in the real world; particularly situations where the subject of sex is appropriate. I have thought about visiting a sex club, but the safety issues make me think it's probably a bad idea. Autistic people are at a greater risk for rape than neurotypicals. Given that I have some difficulties verbal speech, if someone does something uncomfortable; I might have trouble saying no.

Again, I apologizes for making people feel uncomfortable. Discussions of sex have a habit of doing that. I am just trying to sort out my own sexuality and AVEN seemed like the most logical place to do that.

*EDIT* I would like to clarify something. Being Autistic I can have a really intense interest in something for a while then have almost no interest for a while. Right now the subject of sex is on my mind. So I am devoting a fair bit of mental energy to it. At some point I will lose interest in this subject and devote little to not mental energy on the subject. Some time after that I will pick it back up and devote more mental energy to it. Basically it amounts too is high levels of interest for short periods of time, then little to not interest. It comes in waves. So I am not some horn dog that thinks about sex with people 24/7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: I'll just point out that I have two female friends from AVEN who are now expressing trepidation at the idea of asexual meetups after seeing this thread, not having realized that there were AVENites who identify as asexual who are actually actively seeking sex with other asexuals. The support the OP has received in this thread shows that there are possibly more people like this than just the OP, so I can see where their concern is coming from. I don't know a lot of people well on AVEN, so if two of the only people I know well are feeling this way after seeing this (given the amount of members there are on AVEN) then there are guaranteed to be others who will feel this way after reading this thread. So cheers for making this so uncomfortable now for people who identify as ace because they (like most aces) have no innate desire to seek partnered sex and were hoping that ace-meets were a safe place to meet people who won't look at them like sex objects.

Good to know people think I want to have sex just cause I was trying to be nice and say that it was wrong to label others(which it blasted is!). Whatever happened to the no asexual elitism? Well I can tell ya, there is a lot on this thread. The OP has stated several times they might be grey, they've stated several times they were describing their own sex and not others, and they stated several times that they would never want sex with someone that wasn't interested in it. That's all pretty clear cut, but if you want to keep ignoring that so you can keep harping on the OP over and over again fine. I am leaving this thread. I don't much care for a label war and for people making assumptions on my sexuality just because I don't want to judge others. I'm out of here.

Sorry op. Once again you can PM me if you want to talk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

EDIT: I'll just point out that I have two female friends from AVEN who are now expressing trepidation at the idea of asexual meetups after seeing this thread, not having realized that there were AVENites who identify as asexual who are actually actively seeking sex with other asexuals. The support the OP has received in this thread shows that there are possibly more people like this than just the OP, so I can see where their concern is coming from. I don't know a lot of people well on AVEN, so if two of the only people I know well are feeling this way after seeing this (given the amount of members there are on AVEN) then there are guaranteed to be others who will feel this way after reading this thread. So cheers for making this so uncomfortable now for people who identify as ace because they (like most aces) have no innate desire to seek partnered sex and were hoping that ace-meets were a safe place to meet people who won't look at them like sex objects.

Good to know people think I want to have sex just cause I was trying to be nice and say that it was wrong to label others(which it blasted is!). Whatever happened to the no asexual elitism? Well I can tell ya, there is a lot on this thread. The OP has stated several times they might be grey, they've stated several times they were describing their own sex and not others, and they stated several times that they would never want sex with someone that wasn't interested in it. That's all pretty clear cut, but if you want to keep ignoring that so you can keep harping on the OP over and over again fine. I am leaving this thread. I don't much care for a label war and for people making assumptions on my sexuality just because I don't want to judge others. I'm out of here.

Sorry op. Once again you can PM me if you want to talk.

I have to wonder. If I replaced the word asexual with gray or demi; how would this thread been taken? It seems that some people are offended at the notion that an asexual would be interested in sex at all. I just doubled checked the terms gray and demi. Demi for sure doesn't apply. "Demisexual is used, generally, to describe people who only experience sexual attraction after first forming a strong emotional connection." I tend to not experiance sexual attraction pretty much ever these days. Hence why I chose the label asexual. Another term on the AVEN FAQ was hyposexual. From what I can tell that refers to a low libido. Given that I masturbate daily, I don't have a low libido. The most accurate term would probably be cupiosexual which I wasn't aware of till someone on this thread mentioned it. Urban dictionary defines cupiosexual as "An extention of the asexual spectrum in which one desires a sexual relationship, but feels no sexual attraction towards anyone." But then there is a question of relationships. Is there a deference between wanting a sexual relationship and just wanting sex?

All of this of course leads to the debate on labels. Do we really need so many damn labels. This sort of the debate happens in the transgender community. I like using the term transgender as an umbrella term. But some transsexuals don't because they don't want to be lumped in with crossdressers. I personally think it would be nice if asexual could be used as an umbrella term like transgender. An asexual would be someone with no (or very little) sexual attraction to people. People could then pick and choose labels based on their level of interest in sex and romance; or whatever. I fall under the umbrella term of transgender; but more specifically I am genderqueer and transsexual. This thread probably isn't the place to debate this issue. I may just go ahead and start another thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to know people think I want to have sex just cause I was trying to be nice and say that it was wrong to label others(which it blasted is!).

Whatever happened to the no asexual elitism?

Wasn't referring to you eched!

And no one was saying the OP cannot identify as asexual as opposed to Gray or Allo or whatever, all we are saying is the OP will be identifying as asexual for very different reasons than the vast majority of other AVENites identify as asexual (ie because the OP does have an innate desire to seek partnered sex, they just have no preference for gender or appearance as long as the person ''isn't repulsive'' - whereas generally asexuals identify as such because they have no innate drive to seek out/have partnered sex, regardless of which gender(s) they are attracted to romantically and/or aesthetically and/or sensually) .. that's all.

Naosuu pretty much summed up really well what everyone else in this thread has been saying:

It's the true Scotsman thing. "Asexuals have no interest in sex", "But I have an interest in sex", "True asexuals have no interest in sex".

I believe this particular bit is a misunderstanding of what other posters were trying to say.

Asexuals can be interested in sex for their own curiosity; however, it's an entirely different thing to say "I want to have sexual activity that involves other people." From my own observation, it's not a question of being a "true" asexual since asexual elitism is highly discouraged here, but it's obvious that the vast majority of asexuals are not driven to have partnered sexual activity. It might be something that they muse about (or even try if the opportunity presents itself) but it's definitively not something that they feel needs to be done.

Just based on your posts, it appears that you are driven, in some shape or form, to have sexual activities with other people. Again, based on what you've said, it also appears that it's more than just a curiosity and that there's something intrinsically tied to partner sexual activity that attracts you and makes you want to have it. As some other posters have said, this is a characteristic that contradicts the vast majority of asexual AVENites here. In my own opinion, I think it would help to keep your eyes open a little longer and avoid getting too attached to labels too quickly.

Ultimately, labels are there to guide you. They shouldn't limit your identity, experiences nor how you see yourself. :cake:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point was that if someone desires sex with someone who is ugly by societal standards; then attraction and desire are not intimately linked or they have really poor taste in women.

I don't think "sexual attraction" as the "innate desire for partnered sex" has anything to do with "societal standards" and instead has to do with personal standards.

It reminds me of the phrase "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" because it is. I can appreciate aesthetics and what I consider beauty or aesthetically attractive isn't necessarily the same as whatever the media or "societal standards" portray as beauty or aesthetically attractive.

If someone else told me that what I thought was beautiful wasn't, well, then I'd tell them that it's beautiful to me. It doesn't matter if it's beautiful to them or to anyone else. Also, if they then told me that I had "poor taste," then I could say the same thing to them, however, regardless of what is or isn't said, it's definitely clear that we have different tastes.

At this point the definition of Asexuality should be: Someone who feels they are asexual.

I agree.

If it's unclear what "asexuality" is, then it makes it a pretty useless label. It also makes visibility and education efforts difficult. I'm not sure if or when "asexuality" will be generally accepted by society as a valid sexual orientation if this type of confusion and lack of clarity persists.

2. Cupiosexual is a useless and somewhat problematic word. If you don't experience sexual attraction but you want sex, you're gray. Period. You don't need to invent or take on some new label, especially when that label implies you're 100% asexual despite needing/wanting sex, because that just doesn't make sense. And gray-asexuality exists for reasons like this, to cover people who aren't experiencing sexuality like the average allosexual person but who isn't completely asexual either. I don't understand why there is so much resistance and reluctance to the gray-asexual identity by some of these self-proclaimed aces who are clearly more gray- than not. The most common definition of gray-asexual already describes a person who "rarely experiences sexual attraction," so there you go.

4. Considering 75% of aces are romantic and most aces neither want, like, nor need sex and only ever consider it to please romantic partners, I don't understand your logic behind thinking that have sex with other aces would solve your "no intimate connection, just sex" desire. The aces who have sex, usually only do it BECAUSE of the intimate connection they have with the other person.

In conclusion: gray-asexuality fits your experiences.

I really do feel like there are way too many labels these days and too much focus on labels. It really doesn't matter what the labels are. I definitely agree that "Grey-sexuality" fits a sexual orientation that isn't clear, at least, that's my understanding of what it means to be "Grey-sexual." I view "Grey-sexuality" as "my sexual orientation is different from most people who identify as asexual and most people who identify as sexual, so, I'm somewhere in between, it's not a black or white distinction for me."

Link to post
Share on other sites
IceHurricane

I do want to have sex, at least once. I think about it a lot, but I'm not sure if It'll ever happen. I think I'm more likely to die a virgin since I have no social life, I rarely leave the house, and I'm very shy, awkward and insecure. The chances of me ever finding a male who would want to have sex with me seems more unlikely as time goes on and the more I think about it, the more doubts I have. I play out different scenarios in my head and sometimes I wonder if it would just be better to get rid of this hope before I make a fool of myself. I have a pretty low libido, and I'm obviously not going to die without sex. I've spent nineteen years sex-free and it hasn't really bothered me, I'm sure I'll have no problem living the rest of my life without it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

I do want to have sex, at least once. I think about it a lot, but I'm not sure if It'll ever happen. I think I'm more likely to die a virgin since I have no social life, I rarely leave the house, and I'm very shy, awkward and insecure. The chances of me ever finding a male who would want to have sex with me seems more unlikely as time goes on and the more I think about it, the more doubts I have. I play out different scenarios in my head and sometimes I wonder if it would just be better to get rid of this hope before I make a fool of myself. I have a pretty low libido, and I'm obviously not going to die without sex. I've spent nineteen years sex-free and it hasn't really bothered me, I'm sure I'll have no problem living the rest of my life without it.

The situations I have been in were just luck. Someone else initiated things and I went along for the ride. If those situations hadn't presented them selves I would still be a virgin. Situations like that seem to be rare. So I don't know how likely it is that I will ever have sex again in my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

A google search turned up a cracked article on asexuality.

http://www.cracked.com/article_21988_6-weird-ways-world-looks-different-when-youre-asexual.html

In the comment thread someone had this to say. Emphasis mine.

Asexuals masturbate because we have a sex drive and physically capable of arousal. Masturbation is about stimulating your genitals to get a physical release. You can do it with your own hands. Doesn't mean you're sexually attracted to your own hands. You can do it with sex toys. Doesn't mean you are sexually attracted to the toys. Some people can get sexually aroused by stimulation from another person even if they are not sexually attracted to that person. For many people mental and physical arousal is interconnected that they won't be able to enjoy being stimulated by something or someone they are not sexually attracted to. That's when sexual fantasies and imagination come into play. Some asexuals think about nothing when they masturbate. It's purely a physical process. Others think about their kinks and fetishes since they are not about specific gender or people.

What we lack is sexual attraction. We have sexual desires (because we have sex drives) that aren't directed towards anyone of any gender. I can't really explain sexual attraction to you because I have never experienced it but I know what lack of it feels like. How do you feel when you look at the gender or people you're not sexually attracted to? Nothing, right? That's how asexuals feel. I hope that clears your confusion.

That person makes the point I was trying to make. Although I think they explained it better.

There is also this thread on autochorissexualism that also explains some of what I have been trying to say.

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/74569-autochorissexualism/

In particular this bit from Sennkestra

Personally, though, I tend to be more interested in the idea of dissociation of the act from the individuals involved in the act: for example, in my personal experience, I can sometimes get aroused by things that are sexually charged - fanfiction, art, even scientific articles occasionally. However, what is noticeable is that it's not an attraction to any particular participants in the act, but to the idea of the act itself. It's another theme that I've actually seen in other discussions of masturbation, fantasy, etc: that many people can still be aroused by sexual activity or sensations, but that the interest is in the act, not the other people involved - a dissociation of the acts themselves from the people involved. (Although this may often be paired with dissociation of ones own participation from the idea of the act as well.) In cases like this, erotic material can be arousing because it is a representation of situtations, regardless of whether one is particularly interested in the people. For example, a straight man watching a porn video of heterosexual intercourse may not be particularly sexually attracted to the male participant, but the participant is still necessary to represent the act of interest (intercourse). Similarly, an asexual who has interest in certain acts or situation may be interested in material which involves that situtation, without actually having any interest in the participants.

When it comes to sex I am aroused by/attracted too situations, acts, objects, and body parts; but not people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder. If I replaced the word asexual with gray or demi; how would this thread been taken?

Seeing as that's exactly what the people, myself included, who disagree with your choice of calling yourself "asexual" have said themselves? I think it would have gone very smoothly indeed. There are more than enough bits in your self-description that show you are almost certainly not "purely" pansexual.

Gray-pansexual, which I have said right in my first pot in this thread, and still stand by it, is a label that, IMO, describes your experience perfectly (and a million times better than "asexual" does). It also is one specific form of gray-asexual.

However, gray and demi are not, have never been, and will never be the same as asexuality. If you're gray or demi, then you aren't asexual. That's what being gray means - the entire concept of grayness would be utterly pointless if they were the same. (It's why the definition of asexuality must be "no innate desire for partnered sex", not "little or no [etc.]". Little = gray. Ace = zero, exactly.)

And because you'd likely complain if I said this in the other thread (what with the "dragging things over" and all) - you cannot be asexual and pansexual at the same time any more than you can be a vegan carnivore. Your chosen labels make no logical sense, so I will not validate them. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're choosing to identify this way out of sincere, legitimate confusion, but I do honestly think that you are confused and mislabeling yourself. Whatever your orientation is, it obviously is not the one you proclaim it to be, because your professed orientation does not and cannot exist in the real world - it is logically impossible due to internal contradiction.

Now, of course you are still free to mislabel yourself as a "(pansexual) asexual", if you insist on doing so - for whatever reason. I quite obviously can't stop you from doing so (not just due to AVEN's ToS, but simply by being a separate person than you). However, I will do nothing to support you in that choice, and neither will I support definitions of asexuality that include your experience under its umbrella (that would be an umbrella that I just see as way too huge and fuzzy to have any real-world relevance, let alone to describe a valid, legitimate orientation). If I started supporting this, I would ruin my own logical integrity. To me, no amount of political correctness can ever be worth that cost.

As an aside...

I guess, and hope, that these last sentences at least can ring a bell with you if you're on the autistic spectrum. My hardliner rejection of stuff that just doesn't make any logical sense is one of the things that have repeatedly made therapists speculate whether I may be on that spectrum too, though they never yet formally diagnosed it and still go by the vagueness of "combined personality disorder". (A vagueness my current psych openly admitted to me... as long as I get treatment and assistance that helps me, which continues to work pretty smoothly for a good number of years by now, noone up there in the social services or health insurance offices really gives a damn about the specific diagnosis. *shrug* )

Re: your last post (#103)...

Arousal =/= desire. (It's possible to be aroused, to the point of orgasm, by being raped.)

Enjoyment =/= desire. (Sex-repulsed sexuals. 'nuff said.)

Neither of these quotes you gave are really relevant to this discussion, unless you mean to say that you don't desire sex with people after all, you can just be aroused by it and enjoy it and mistakenly described that as meaning you "want sex". (If so, you pretty much go back on the entire premise of the thread: Nope, no asexual is interested in sex with people... not even you. ;) Of course, that would be a massive gamechanger on this entire discussion, to the point where "vote for close & restart from space one" begins to sound like the best strategy.)

Neither arousal nor enjoyment makes you any less ace. It's just desiring sex with people that does make you sexual, if you still stand by saying that you do.

At this point the definition of Asexuality should be: Someone who feels they are asexual.

I agree.

If it's unclear what "asexuality" is, then it makes it a pretty useless label. It also makes visibility and education efforts difficult. I'm not sure if or when "asexuality" will be generally accepted by society as a valid sexual orientation if this type of confusion and lack of clarity persists.

Indeed. And that's a lot more mildly than I'd put it, and only part of that is due to my current, admittedly foul, mood... so I'll leave it at that,

Link to post
Share on other sites
passionatefriend61

And as an asexual with an active libido who's been masturbating since I was a kid, I understand perfectly what it is to be aroused by sexual content and not people. But arousal is not attraction, nor does having a libido and masturbating mean you want to have partnered sex. I certainly don't. I've had fantasies about sex involving myself over the years, sure, but it's very clear to me that in reality, I don't actually want to enact those fantasies, nor would I feel comfortable if anyone suddenly sexually propositioned me. I COULD have partnered sex, if I wanted to, if I was curious, and I'm sure I could orgasm and physically enjoy it. But psychologically and emotionally, there's a good chance I wouldn't enjoy it at all, and I certainly don't see partnered sex as necessary to satisfy my libido or anything else. In fact, I think the advantages of masturbating to deal with libido/desire for orgasm far outweigh the possible advantages of partnered sex, and the fact that I even feel that way is a pretty clear indication that I am not allosexual. No matter what my sex drive is like, no matter how much I like orgasms, regardless of my ability to get aroused, and regardless of my low levels of sex-repulsion/aversion. The fact that I like to use porn to get off, doesn't actually mean I want to have partnered sex with anyone ever. The same goes for reading erotica or conjuring up sexual fantasies. To me, it's all just for the sole purpose of achieving arousal, so that I can get off--and it doesn't make me any more willing to get fucked by other people than the asexuals who have no libido, can't get aroused, and never orgasm. In fact, there are some nonlibidoist aces who experience next to no sexual pleasure who are routinely having sex in romantic relationships to please their allosexual partners, and I'm significantly less willing to engage in partnered sex than they are, despite being way more likely to physically enjoy it. Their reasons for having sex have nothing to do with pleasure, arousal, or sex drive, just like my reasons for not having sex, have nothing to do with pleasure, arousal, or sex drive.

Arousal doesn't mean a person wants partnered sex or is experiencing sexual attraction. Rape victims can get aroused. Child victims of pedophilia can get aroused. Arousal is just a bodily reaction that can happen for all kinds of reasons, some of which have nothing to do with sex.

Of course arousal and the ability to orgasm or feel sexual pleasure can coexist with asexuality--both lack of sexual attraction and lack of desire for partnered sex--but you can't compare wanting to masturbate to deal with a sex drive you can't eliminate (and being satisfied by that) with wanting to have partnered sex with other humans beings instead. I understand that if you've got a penis, masturbation is never going to feel as good as partnered sex because touching yourself with your hand is a very different sensation that penetrating someone else or having somebody blow you. But even so, preferring partnered sex to masturbation is a pretty sexual way to feel, in the "sexual person" sense. All you gotta do is look around here to find a conversation where a confused ace says, "Why can't sexual people just masturbate and be happy with that, instead of demanding sex from their ace romantic partner?" and unanimously, the sexual people who respond go, "It's not the same." If it was just about physical release and satisfying sexual urges, masturbation would be enough, and it is if you're ace. But wanting partnered sex seems to be about more than just that release for actual allosexual people. If it wasn't, then none of them would go through so much trouble to pursue partnered sex, mope when they aren't getting laid, and refuse to give sex up in their mixed romantic relationships with aces in mass numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the RealDoll site got me wondering about something. Asexuality is a lack of sexual attraction; but is that sexual attraction in general or just sexual attraction to people? The photos of the dolls turned me on. But if it were a real person in the photos it probably wouldn't have done much of anything for me. They make RealDolls modeled after real life porn stars. I bet one of those dolls would turn me on but a porn video with the real porn star probably wouldn't. There is also the question of attraction VS desire. If a doll turns me on sexually, is that sexual desire or sexual attraction or what? If we define asexuality is as no (or almost no) sexual attraction to people; then I fit the bill. If it's sexual attraction in general without regard to who or what it's directed at; then I might not qualify as asexual. In regards to dolls I came across the term Agalmatophilia; which wikipedia defines as "

a paraphilia involving sexual attraction to a statue, doll, mannequin or other similar figurative object.". Of course that's a paraphilia not a sexual orientation. It seems that sexual orientation is specifically in reference to people. So in that case it may be correct to state that my sexual orientation is asexual since I am not sexually attracted to people.

I don't see why for some people "I am attracted only to dolls" can't be a sexual orientation. It could be a paraphilia, it could be a fetish, it could be an orientation, or could be some combination of the above.

You're right that your orientation is what it is regardless of what label you use to describe it. Labels do matter though in the sense that other people attach meanings to them and if someone uses a term that's generally accepted to have one meaning to mean something different from how others understand it, even if they're clear about that upfront, it can (depending on the context) upset others who use that label. That's part of the reason why there are so many labels!

Here, have a non-exhaustive list:

http://www.yaygender.net/pages/gender.pl

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, though, I tend to be more interested in the idea of dissociation of the act from the individuals involved in the act: for example, in my personal experience, I can sometimes get aroused by things that are sexually charged - fanfiction, art, even scientific articles occasionally. However, what is noticeable is that it's not an attraction to any particular participants in the act, but to the idea of the act itself. It's another theme that I've actually seen in other discussions of masturbation, fantasy, etc: that many people can still be aroused by sexual activity or sensations, but that the interest is in the act, not the other people involved - a dissociation of the acts themselves from the people involved. (Although this may often be paired with dissociation of ones own participation from the idea of the act as well.) In cases like this, erotic material can be arousing because it is a representation of situtations, regardless of whether one is particularly interested in the people. For example, a straight man watching a porn video of heterosexual intercourse may not be particularly sexually attracted to the male participant, but the participant is still necessary to represent the act of interest (intercourse). Similarly, an asexual who has interest in certain acts or situation may be interested in material which involves that situtation, without actually having any interest in the participants.

When it comes to sex I am aroused by/attracted too situations, acts, objects, and body parts; but not people.

That itself seems like a valid sexual orientation to me. This also explains why you want to think of people as objects in order to have sex with them.

We need a word for this type of orientation. (IMO "orientation" is way too narrowly defined, usually only by gender. But there are lost of other types of orientations such as this that have a different axis as their primary characteristic, even if gender is relevant in some other way.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder. If I replaced the word asexual with gray or demi; how would this thread been taken?

Seeing as that's exactly what the people, myself included, who disagree with your choice of calling yourself "asexual" have said themselves? I think it would have gone very smoothly indeed. There are more than enough bits in your self-description that show you are almost certainly not "purely" pansexual.

Gray-pansexual, which I have said right in my first pot in this thread, and still stand by it, is a label that, IMO, describes your experience perfectly (and a million times better than "asexual" does). It also is one specific form of gray-asexual.

However, gray and demi are not, have never been, and will never be the same as asexuality. If you're gray or demi, then you aren't asexual. That's what being gray means - the entire concept of grayness would be utterly pointless if they were the same. (It's why the definition of asexuality must be "no innate desire for partnered sex", not "little or no [etc.]". Little = gray. Ace = zero, exactly.)

While IMO demisexuality is pretty specific, "Grey-A" is a catch-all term for many different experiences that for one reason or another don't fit. So I do not disagree that by definition, Grey-A folks "aren't asexual." It's not black and white, and Grey-A as a category is, by definition, well, grey.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

The only reason I have any desire to have sex with other people is because there are sex acts that necessitate other people. I guess what it comes down too is a desire for the sex act and not the person. So any desire for sex with people is because I don't have a way of engaging in X Y or Z sex act without involving other people. Being sexually pleasured while tied up isn't the easiest thing to do by your self. So someone else would have to do it for me. ;)

Then there is the issue of fetishes. As I have said I have a foot fetish. Feet typically come attached to people. So if I want to play with feet other than my own; that again necessitates other people.

So rather than saying that I want to have sex with people. It's probably more accurate to say that I want to engage in sex acts that require other people. Again, if holodecks existed; that would solve all my sexuality problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why for some people "I am attracted only to dolls" can't be a sexual orientation. It could be a paraphilia, it could be a fetish, it could be an orientation, or could be some combination of the above.

I actually agree, aside from wording it as "attracted to" instead of "desire sex with". Which is why I consider the differentiation between orientation and preference pretty artificial. Orientations are (partner) preferences. Maybe it would be best to discard the term orientation entirely and just say preference in all cases...

...but yeah, fat chance that'll ever happen.

Also, I've said it some months before - I can't help but think of fetishism (in its strictest, old-fashioned paraphilia sense, not just as a modern synonym for kinks) as one specific form of asexuality. If there's no desire for sex with a partner, then that's ace in my book - no matter if you then want to get freaky with a chair, a shoe, or a refridgerator. ;) And dolls, while humanoid, aren't human, alive, sentient, or in any other way fit to count as partners. (It's going to get complicated if and when we come up with self-aware roobots, though... but all of society will become challenged by that invention, so it's no surprise that concepts of sexuality will be challenged, too.)

While IMO demisexuality is pretty specific, "Grey-A" is a catch-all term for many different experiences that for one reason or another don't fit. So I do not disagree that by definition, Grey-A folks "aren't asexual." It's not black and white, and Grey-A as a category is, by definition, well, grey.

Uh... you do not agree, or you do not disagree? *confused*

I don't think you understand the concept of a spectrum, Asexuality really is not grey - it is darkest midnight black with no trace of white, and (allo)sexuality is brightest lily white no trace of black. Grays of all kind are by definition "neither of these two, really, but kinda a bit of both".

If someone one were to think that sexuality were all black and white, they would have to say that demis and grays simply do not exist, period. (Ace elistists, of course, would do exactly that, and just lump them in with sexuals.)

The only reason I have any desire to have sex with other people is because there are sex acts that necessitate other people. I guess what it comes down too is a desire for the sex act and not the person. So any desire for sex with people is because I don't have a way of engaging in X Y or Z sex act without involving other people. Being sexually pleasured while tied up isn't the easiest thing to do by your self. So someone else would have to do it for me. ;)

Then there is the issue of fetishes. As I have said I have a foot fetish. Feet typically come attached to people. So if I want to play with feet other than my own; that again necessitates other people.

So rather than saying that I want to have sex with people. It's probably more accurate to say that I want to engage in sex acts that require other people. Again, if holodecks existed; that would solve all my sexuality problems.

Being tied up or playing with feet isn't sex, though. Sex refers to activities of genitals.

If what you mean by "sex" is actually fetish activities with no genital stimulation by another person, that's another check on the list of "why didn't you say that more clearly right from the start"? Serious gamechanger for the entire tone of the thread, dudette. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason I have any desire to have sex with other people is because there are sex acts that necessitate other people. I guess what it comes down too is a desire for the sex act and not the person. So any desire for sex with people is because I don't have a way of engaging in X Y or Z sex act without involving other people. Being sexually pleasured while tied up isn't the easiest thing to do by your self. So someone else would have to do it for me. ;)

Then there is the issue of fetishes. As I have said I have a foot fetish. Feet typically come attached to people. So if I want to play with feet other than my own; that again necessitates other people.

So rather than saying that I want to have sex with people. It's probably more accurate to say that I want to engage in sex acts that require other people. Again, if holodecks existed; that would solve all my sexuality problems.

Being tied up or playing with feet isn't sex, though. Sex refers to activities of genitals.

If what you mean by "sex" is actually fetish activities with no genital stimulation by another person, that's another check on the list of "why didn't you say that more clearly right from the start"? Serious gamechanger for the entire tone of the thread, dudette. :)

Exactly what Mysticus said.

I like all sorts of kinky things that require another person, I think they're fun and enhance intimacy between my partner and I (though I have no desire for them outside of a relationship, and even in a relationship it's take it or leave it. I'm perfectly satisfied with just imagining doing said kinky things with my partner, he doesn't need to be in the same room or even the same country as me for me to enjoy partnered kinky acts with him lol.)... I just have no desire for partnered sex (partnered genital stimulation) with my partner (in my mind or in 'real life').

Partnered sex includes genitals/partnered sexual pleasure by stimulation of genitals etc. That I don't need or want, regardless of whether or not I am aroused. Why bother having sex with another person (which I have no desire for anyway) when I can just masturbate quickly and get rid of arousal like that? Same as running to the loo for a pee to me. Not fun but sometimes it's just gotta be done (well, quite often for me as I have a high libido)

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

Being tied up or playing with feet isn't sex, though. Sex refers to activities of genitals.

If what you mean by "sex" is actually fetish activities with no genital stimulation by another person, that's another check on the list of "why didn't you say that more clearly right from the start"? Serious gamechanger for the entire tone of the thread, dudette. :)

I am still trying to figure things out. Which is why I am here. :) I do enjoy genital stimulation, I do it to my self every day. But at least in my limited experience with other people; having someone else stimulate my genitals feels different than when I do it. On two occasions where someone else stimulated my genitals I thoroughly enjoyed it. I think part of the enjoyment was the lack of effort on my part. I didn't have to get my self aroused, they did that just by touching me. I also didn't have to put in any of the work to achieve the orgasm. I just laid back and enjoyed the ride.

Speaking of arousal, it's been frustrating at times that orgasms and sexual arousal go hand in hand. Years ago I was on hormones. I was taking a testosterone blocker which resulted in a lower libido. I still had the same desire for orgasms but I just couldn't get aroused enough to make it happen. Even though I am not on hormones anymore, I still have some difficulties in that department. Sometimes I will try a sexual fantasy and it doesn't work; so I switch to another fantasy. If that doesn't work I have to come up with a new sexual fantasy. I can typically get aroused enough to ejaculate, but the orgasms may not be very good. But orgasms are good; so even if an orgasm isn't that good, it's still good and enjoyable. It's just not as enjoyable as I would like it to be. I have a couple of excellent books on masturbation; which I posted a thread about a while back. Perhaps I need to reread those. Thanks to the material in those books I was able to achieve a multiple orgasm. Yes it is indeed possible for biologically male people to have a genuine multiple orgasms. And let me tell you, multiple orgasms are awesome. unfortunately I only ever had a genuine multiple orgasm once. If I could consistently give my self really excellent orgasms; then I am sure I would be less likely to want to have sex with people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If what you mean by "sex" is actually fetish activities with no genital stimulation by another person, that's another check on the list of "why didn't you say that more clearly right from the start"? Serious gamechanger for the entire tone of the thread, dudette. :)

You know, outside of AVEN (and I think also many inside of AVEN, but they know that speaking up isn't smart on here) there would be lots of people who would think that playing with feet (licking, touching, whatever) or being tied up and touched (or not) if it's because it turns you on and helps you release your libido (orgasming or not) is not something that would fall under "asexual".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why for some people "I am attracted only to dolls" can't be a sexual orientation. It could be a paraphilia, it could be a fetish, it could be an orientation, or could be some combination of the above.

I actually agree, aside from wording it as "attracted to" instead of "desire sex with". Which is why I consider the differentiation between orientation and preference pretty artificial. Orientations are (partner) preferences. Maybe it would be best to discard the term orientation entirely and just say preference in all cases...

...but yeah, fat chance that'll ever happen.

Also, I've said it some months before - I can't help but think of fetishism (in its strictest, old-fashioned paraphilia sense, not just as a modern synonym for kinks) as one specific form of asexuality. If there's no desire for sex with a partner, then that's ace in my book - no matter if you then want to get freaky with a chair, a shoe, or a refridgerator. ;) And dolls, while humanoid, aren't human, alive, sentient, or in any other way fit to count as partners. (It's going to get complicated if and when we come up with self-aware roobots, though... but all of society will become challenged by that invention, so it's no surprise that concepts of sexuality will be challenged, too.)

While IMO demisexuality is pretty specific, "Grey-A" is a catch-all term for many different experiences that for one reason or another don't fit. So I do not disagree that by definition, Grey-A folks "aren't asexual." It's not black and white, and Grey-A as a category is, by definition, well, grey.

Uh... you do not agree, or you do not disagree? *confused*

I don't think you understand the concept of a spectrum, Asexuality really is not grey - it is darkest midnight black with no trace of white, and (allo)sexuality is brightest lily white no trace of black. Grays of all kind are by definition "neither of these two, really, but kinda a bit of both".

If someone one were to think that sexuality were all black and white, they would have to say that demis and grays simply do not exist, period. (Ace elistists, of course, would do exactly that, and just lump them in with sexuals.)

The only reason I have any desire to have sex with other people is because there are sex acts that necessitate other people. I guess what it comes down too is a desire for the sex act and not the person. So any desire for sex with people is because I don't have a way of engaging in X Y or Z sex act without involving other people. Being sexually pleasured while tied up isn't the easiest thing to do by your self. So someone else would have to do it for me. ;)

Then there is the issue of fetishes. As I have said I have a foot fetish. Feet typically come attached to people. So if I want to play with feet other than my own; that again necessitates other people.

So rather than saying that I want to have sex with people. It's probably more accurate to say that I want to engage in sex acts that require other people. Again, if holodecks existed; that would solve all my sexuality problems.

Being tied up or playing with feet isn't sex, though. Sex refers to activities of genitals.

If what you mean by "sex" is actually fetish activities with no genital stimulation by another person, that's another check on the list of "why didn't you say that more clearly right from the start"? Serious gamechanger for the entire tone of the thread, dudette. :)

"Attracted to," "desire sex with," "orientation"... /shrug/ I can see an argument for using orientation just for people, and I can see an argument for opening it up and including fetishes as orientations in their own right. I think of "orientation" as having multiple axes. One is about gender of partners, others can be about other partner qualities, or fetishes, or whether one is monogamous or poly by nature, etc. These can all be thought of as types of sexual "orientation," as vectors in the multidimensional space of sexual expression. Typically, though, only one axis is referred to as an orientation.

I meant "I do not agree," thanks for the catch.

You say: "Sex refers to activities of genitals."

That is one definition. In that definition, there isn't any ambiguity. But it also is a definition which erases as "not really sex" all the sex and sexual relationships I've personally had MY ENTIRE LIFE, and oh trust me, that was sex. (See the bit under my userpic!) Yes, I know that most people aren't telepathic, and so mind sex isn't a thing for most people, but this is intrinsic to my sexuality (attraction, sex itself, everything).

What I meant by "grey is grey" is to discuss this "paradox." If mind-sex (which is no less partnered, intense, sexual, and mutual) is not counted (because come on, I face erasure as a telepathic person all the time, with everyone telling me my senses and my sexuality "aren't real"), then I'm asexual because no way do I ever want genital contact with another person. I'm sex repulsed when it comes to bodies. But I AM sexually attracted to people, which manifests for me as a strong desire to have telepathic sex with them (whether they are capable of it or not... hi frustration). Even if from the outside people would see two fully clothed people lying together and intensely hugging (well, aside from sounds...), that doesn't make it "not sex" if for the people involved, it is. Let's just say there's other ways people can have sex, and it's not always about bodies. And my sexuality is unusual in that it's entirely on that axis. I'm sex repulsed on the physical axis.

So I'm asexual, if you define "real sex" as only genital contact/physical penetration. But if you take what is sex to me as real (and I hope you afford me that respect), then I'm also Grey-A (because I experience attraction/do desire partnered sex rarely). Or rather, the number of people I find attractive in that way is small, not that when I meet such a person, I have these desires rarely!

I don't want to derail this thread to be all about me. I just want to point out a way in which grey is grey, and in which under the "but only genitals count!" definition, I'm asexual.

Personally, I'm fine saying, "So most people assume sex is XYZ. Under this definition, I'm asexual, because XYZ. However, that's not the whole story because XYZ, and so when those critical pieces are not left out, I'm an unusual kind of Grey-A." I'm not married to a category or label -- my sexuality was what it was before I ever heard of any of these labels, maybe even since before they were coined. It's a pointless search for the so-called "right label," because these labels are never going to be designed with people like me in mind. That's why I like Grey-A -- it's a way of saying, "it's complicated."

Link to post
Share on other sites

If what you mean by "sex" is actually fetish activities with no genital stimulation by another person, that's another check on the list of "why didn't you say that more clearly right from the start"? Serious gamechanger for the entire tone of the thread, dudette. :)

You know, outside of AVEN (and I think also many inside of AVEN, but they know that speaking up isn't smart on here) there would be lots of people who would think that playing with feet (licking, touching, whatever) or being tied up and touched (or not) if it's because it turns you on and helps you release your libido (orgasming or not) is not something that would fall under "asexual".

I can see the argument either way, and I think it's up to people to self identify. Are they ace, and have this kink or fetish? Are they some form of Grey-A? Are they sexual and not into genitals or penetration? Up to them what words to use, as it suits them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the RealDoll site got me wondering about something. Asexuality is a lack of sexual attraction; but is that sexual attraction in general or just sexual attraction to people?

Lack of sexual attraction as a whole, it never was meant to (and hopefully never will) even imply paraphilia. Think about it, if you were to identify as female and homosexual, that would mean that you're into other women, not little girls or female animals. Like we said in your other thread, kinks, fetishes and libido are completely separate from all of this.

"So, does that mean you're into animals?" or "Are you a pedo?" were actually two things I was asked already. That's knock-out-material if I ever heard any. I really don't want to take a trip down this lane, but food for thought. So many people who have paraphilias of the nonconsensual sort actually speak of a genuine hetero, homo, etc. sexual orientation beside their paraphilia; their relationships are not just cover-ups or fakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

I was looking at the thread regarding the definition of sexual attraction.

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/77043-defining-sexual-attraction/

Which lead to this section of the wiki on the primary VS secondary attraction model.

http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.php?title=Primary_vs._secondary_sexual_attraction_model

Based on that model I would describe my self this way. Primary sexual attraction: NO. Secondary sexual attraction: Probably not. Primary Sexual Desire: Absolutely yes!. Secondary Sexual Desire: Hell no, I find the concept repulsive.

Now if sexual attraction is defined as a desire for partnered sex (as AVEN does) then the attraction VS desire model doesn't work.

Anyone know if there is a suffix to refer to sexual desires? Sexual is used for sexual orientation. I would describe my sexual orientation as asexual. I would describe my sexual desire as pansexual. So it would be pan-desire suffix.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

I was just thinking about what would actually be involved in me finding a sex partner.

A: Join hook up website.

I would of course disclose my disability and gender/sex. That would illiminate some people because they aren't interested in sex with someone who is Autistic or transgender. Out of the people left I would have to sift out the creeps. I don't want people with a fetish for people with developmental disabilities. I also don't want people who are interested because they see me as an easy target. Unfortunately Autistic people are a high risk for rape. I don't need to become a rape statistic

B: Interact online with potential candidates.

There would have be some amount of online discussion before I met anyone in the real world

C. Real world meeting.

Next would be meeting someone in the real world to discuss things. I would want to discuss things like what kind of sex acts we are interested (or not) in. The meeting would have to be at a public place like a coffee shop. We would probably have to meet more than once.

D. Meet up for sex.

We would have to meet up somewhere for sex. Going to their place has some safety issues. So it would have to be at a sex club. The only one I know of around here is in San Francisco. So I would have to hop on public transit to get there.

E. Have sex.

Finally after all that work I get to have sex

I don't have enough of a desire for sex to go through all that hassle. If someone I trust were to introduce me to someone, I might go for that. A prostitute would be another option. But the trick would be finding a prostitute that has experience dealing with Autistic people. I believe such things might exist in the UK or Netherlands. But I don't know if any such prostitutes are available in the United States.

So the way things look; I wouldn't be surprised if I went the rest of my life without sex. Which wouldn't bother me that much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha. I just discovered this thread - I didn't pay any attention to it, because I'm a bit sex-repulsed and don't usually read anything in the sex and grey-A - forum. Now I understand why people were so excited about the "asexuality as an umbrella"-thread. Wow... this is really awkward, because I still totally believe what I wrote in the other thread but reading this makes me uncomfortable...

Well, that's something to think about. Maybe I'll post something here after I arranged my thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
purplemutant

Ha. I just discovered this thread - I didn't pay any attention to it, because I'm a bit sex-repulsed and don't usually read anything in the sex and grey-A - forum. Now I understand why people were so excited about the "asexuality as an umbrella"-thread. Wow... this is really awkward, because I still totally believe what I wrote in the other thread but reading this makes me uncomfortable...

Well, that's something to think about. Maybe I'll post something here after I arranged my thoughts.

Yea I had hopped that people wouldn't drag stuff from here onto the other thread. That's why I refrained from posting a link to this thread. I want to discuss the idea of asexuality as an umbrella term; without all the baggage from this thread. Which is why I started another thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is kind of my own fault since even though I knew there was another thread I decided not to search for it. It still would have been more honest if you had put the link in there or shortly described this thread because the topics are linked thematically. If I'd known about this thread I would have tried to make my thoughts in the "umbrella"-thread more clear. I haven't read all of this thread though and I'm not sure if I want to participate in the discussion. After reading some of this I think that you absolutly should be 'allowed' to identify as asexual But! I'd appreciate it if you'd reflect on why you want to identify as asexual and why or if it is important enough to you to claim that identity. I mean you've read my posts in the other thread so you know I really don't care for biological essentialisms or "underlying" or "true" principles that define anyones sexuality. So if you say you're asexual that's fine by me. Just think about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...