My wife is my ace.

[Sally]

Dawns

I'm confused now. First of all you said

"I have no problem with not having sex"

then

"We are not celebate."

What actually is going on?

He explained that they don't go without sex, but he also would have no problem doing so.

[Purnkin Spurce]

Dawns

I'm confused now. First of all you said

"I have no problem with not having sex"

then

"We are not celebate."

What actually is going on?

He did explain that he has no problem having sex, that he and his wife have come to a compromise and he really values her desires and wishes as well. He may prefer to have sex, but he is able to go without it to a point to please his wife as well because he understands her better now. They may both still have sex, but they may not have as much because he truly knows how she feels now. I can't speak for him though, but that's what I gather from his last comment. And his original question is how he can be more supportive to her.

[Dawnsboyrich]

I thought some people might not get that.

I'll do my best to explain, without sounding like a horrible person.

Most of our relationship, my wife and I would have sex somewhat infrequently, but basically whenever I had managed to 'hound' her enough to let it happen.

About a year and a half ago she discovered she was asexual. For a while, she was content knowing that is what she was, and things continued as per normal.

Recently, she has decided she wants to explore her asexuality. I can't speak for her really, and I'll try to get her to chime in, but this means that a few changes needed to take place in our relationship. I said 'as long as we get to stay together, we can refrain from sex or whatever you want' (basically).

So what I mean is, I'm OK not having sex, because the relationship is more important to me. I will stop 'pestering' and asking for it. If I get it, great. If not, no problem, but I'm not asking.

It's still a work in progress, as I am changing 13 or so years of behaviour, but it is my intention.

I'm not really sure this helps explain, but there you have it.

[Ledona]

Ledona, I don't think that the asexual community is criticizing the OP (and we don't claim we're the asexual community). It sounds like those who have posted are pretty impressed with his attitude and his desire to assure his wife that he loves her and appreciates her. It's wonderful to hear that. I think where we got off the track is with another poster who unfortunately chimed in with unhelpful comments. But that happens on all types of forums.

Kudos to you, Dawnsboyrich! :cake:

Good point. Upon a second viewing of the thread, I think I may have been a bit harsh. It's also good that you noted that the responses of a few people on AVEN are not meant to represent the community as a whole.

[NursingGirl]

Ok so I am the ace in the relationship in question here.... My hubby asked me to post my opinion and explanation of what's happening for clarification purposes (although I do think he is doing a fine job on his own)

I suppose the biggest thing here is that after discovering my asexuality I have often wondered if I am "cheating" my SO out of a "normal" relationship. This huge change in his attitude of being alright with not having sex, is because of me questioning if he would be happy finding a relationship that conforms more to his own standards. I feel bad for keeping him from something that in my mind he would make him happier than staying in the relationship. A discussion about my feelings occurred and well now I guess here we sit. He says he'd rather stay with me than be sexual... and I have a hard time feeling like I am taking up a space in his life that could be filled by a sexual relationship, and I could just keep the friendship. (that way he doesn't loose me but can still have all that sex that sexuals like to have.)

Anyways I don't know if that clears things up at all... or if this is even the kind of explanation that he was looking for me to give. But he asked for me to clarify so I have now done my best at doing just that.

[Dawnsboyrich]

But really the most important thing is I want her to know that she's more important than sex, and that I really don't think I'd be happier with a sexual person.

[Philip027]

I suppose the biggest thing here is that after discovering my asexuality I have often wondered if I am "cheating" my SO out of a "normal" relationship.

Presumably, he's a grown man. He can make his own decisions, including the decision to be with you. You're not cheating him out of anything ;)

[Tarfeather]

I suppose the biggest thing here is that after discovering my asexuality I have often wondered if I am "cheating" my SO out of a "normal" relationship.

My partner doesn't love me. Like, genuinely, that's what she says, and after a long time of wanting to believe otherwise, and wanting to believe the evidence to the contrary, I finally have to admit that she's probably right. In my humble opinion, if you do love your husband, that counts for a lot more than having sex or not, and it might just be that he feels the same way.

[Telecaster68]

Well I guess that clears up the position. I was wondering whether the 'OK not having sex' was based on experience or hope.

[Dawnsboyrich]

I guess it's based on the deep seated knowledge that given a choice between sex and a loving relationship with my amazing other half, I can answer without hesitation.

[Telecaster68]

That's great. For myself, while I can intellectually understand that her absence of desire for me is unrelated to love, and in theory there are other ways of expressing love than sex in a relationship, it's absence feels like a massive painful gap in our relationship to me, particularly when it's forever.

I suppose that I feel sex is part of a loving relationship.

[Tarfeather]

That's great. For myself, while I can intellectually understand that her absence of desire for me is unrelated to love, and in theory there are other ways of expressing love than sex in a relationship, it's absence feels like a massive painful gap in our relationship to me, particularly when it's forever.

I suppose that I feel sex is part of a loving relationship.

It seems to me the issue is assuming a romantic relationship, and then being trapped in a constant contradiction of essential aspects of what you consider "romantic" to be missing. It would seem less hurtful to me to assume a friendship and take anything additional (like cuddling, etc.) as "unexpected benefit", not as confirmation of romantic relationship status. But then again, for monogamous couples that's harder I guess, because for them there is some fundamental difference between romantic relationship and friendship that I as relationship anarchist don't really perceive.

[Steve2050]

Maybe we should avoid confusions: Pumpkin Spice wrote "And it's true, some heterosexual men and women are fine with little to no sex" which is tantamount to "it is colder outside than at night". You can be heterosexual and asexual, in which case her definition is perfect, you can be heterosexual and sexual and the definition is totally wrong. So the "heterosexual" part plays no role.

I think this site would make a quantum leap if the asexual community were to refrain from stating how much sex, both quantitatively and qualitatively, a sexual man or woman actually needs in order to be happy. I think the whole purpose of the site is for the asexual community to feel they are not alone, they are backed, they are absolutely normal and that there is no reason why they shouldn't have a wonderful life. Because some of them have married, the couple is brought on board to give her/his opinion. If the partner is also asexual the understanding is perfect. If the partner is sexual, the "mixed" scenario, the vast majority of posts indicate there are problems. It is wonderful that these be explored. And it is twice as wonderful that the asexual community backs the asexual partner in the mixed relationship. But when an asexual member starts writing that it is fine for a sexual partner to do this or that it beats the purpose of the exercise. Asexuals can't even begin to understand what it means for a sexual person to be rejected, neglected and set aside by het/his asexual counterpart. Any guess is way below any benchmark. It is for us, sexuals, to feel, not for asexuals to tell us what we are supposed to feel. Just focus on assisting your fellow asexuals, they really need to come out strong from this site as the rest of the world is so much harsher on them outside. And for asexuals engaging with a sexual partner: just tell them up front. It is up to you whether it will work or not, but if you don't tell them you are actually setting the first wobbling stone.

[Guest]

As a sexual, that's kind of insulting to be honest. The definition of sexual is not "would not be fine without sex". Asexuals lack desire, sexuals do not. Not all sexuals necessarily have the same level of desire. Some are fine going without if need be--in others words it's not a priority, some are fine without sex so long as they are single, and others have such a strong desire that manifests more as a "need". We're not all the same, and it's rather rude to project your experiences on others. It's up to the person what they can or cannot handle.

[Steve2050]

There we go again, Humantoafault: you describe yourself as "not very sexual". Whatever that means. You don't even know because you put two question marks. Who are you to decide that "not all sexuals necessarily..."? You don't have a clue. That's all I'm saying. You are not really helping asexuals because they can feel you are talking as though you knew what it means to be a sexual who is frustrated by a sexless marriage that lasts for many years when you don't know what you are talking about and don't even know who you are. So focus on what you can do to help them, not what you can do to fight against sexuals.

[Lady Girl]

Asexuals can't even begin to understand what it means for a sexual person to be rejected, neglected and set aside by het/his asexual counterpart. Any guess is way below any benchmark. It is for us, sexuals, to feel, not for asexuals to tell us what we are supposed to feel. Just focus on assisting your fellow asexuals, they really need to come out strong from this site as the rest of the world is so much harsher on them outside. And for asexuals engaging with a sexual partner: just tell them up front. It is up to you whether it will work or not, but if you don't tell them you are actually setting the first wobbling stone.

Actually no...saying that asexuals can't even begin to understand is really not fair. People know what it is not to get something they feel they need...most people can relate to that concept and feeling.

I've not experienced anyone on this site telling me how I should feel.

I am somewhat bewildered by your post...it just seems to really discourage asexuals who are in or have been in a relationship with sexual partners from contributing to these conversations. And personally, I appreciate and welcome their input.

[Guest]

I find your posts rather odd, Steve.

For one, you CANNOT be heterosexual AND asexual. Heterosexuals experience sexual attraction to the opposite sex/gender (depending on if you go with sex or gender). Asexuals do not experience sexual attraction. You can't both experience sexual attraction and not.

For two, there ARE sexuals who desire and love sex, but are also OK with not having it. "OK" meaning they are happy with their relationship, even if sex is not part of it. Not every sexual feels it is a need. It's up to each individual. And not feeling like sex is a need does not make one asexual. It just means sexuals are on a spectrum, just like asexuals are on a spectrum. Human sexuality is not black and white. Not being upset to the point of considering no sex a deal breaker doesn't make one asexual.

[Dawnsboyrich]

Maybe we should avoid confusions: Pumpkin Spice wrote "And it's true, some heterosexual men and women are fine with little to no sex" which is tantamount to "it is colder outside than at night". You can be heterosexual and asexual, in which case her definition is perfect, you can be heterosexual and sexual and the definition is totally wrong. So the "heterosexual" part plays no role.

I think this site would make a quantum leap if the asexual community were to refrain from stating how much sex, both quantitatively and qualitatively, a sexual man or woman actually needs in order to be happy. I think the whole purpose of the site is for the asexual community to feel they are not alone, they are backed, they are absolutely normal and that there is no reason why they shouldn't have a wonderful life. Because some of them have married, the couple is brought on board to give her/his opinion. If the partner is also asexual the understanding is perfect. If the partner is sexual, the "mixed" scenario, the vast majority of posts indicate there are problems. It is wonderful that these be explored. And it is twice as wonderful that the asexual community backs the asexual partner in the mixed relationship. But when an asexual member starts writing that it is fine for a sexual partner to do this or that it beats the purpose of the exercise. Asexuals can't even begin to understand what it means for a sexual person to be rejected, neglected and set aside by het/his asexual counterpart. Any guess is way below any benchmark. It is for us, sexuals, to feel, not for asexuals to tell us what we are supposed to feel. Just focus on assisting your fellow asexuals, they really need to come out strong from this site as the rest of the world is so much harsher on them outside. And for asexuals engaging with a sexual partner: just tell them up front. It is up to you whether it will work or not, but if you don't tell them you are actually setting the first wobbling stone.

Steve, I see where you're coming from.

The reason I think some of your posts rub people the wrong way is the words "us", "we", "they", etc.

If you used things like, "I", and "myself", you can parlay your individual experience and people won't think you're trying to speak for them, or for a whole group of people.

Of course, you can do whatever you want. that's just my opinion.

[Tarfeather]

As a sexual, that's kind of insulting to be honest. The definition of sexual is not "would not be fine without sex". Asexuals lack desire, sexuals do not. Not all sexuals necessarily have the same level of desire. Some are fine going without if need be--in others words it's not a priority, some are fine without sex so long as they are single, and others have such a strong desire that manifests more as a "need". We're not all the same, and it's rather rude to project your experiences on others. It's up to the person what they can or cannot handle.

I agree with that, but I think in that case saying you'd be "fine without sex" is just a matter of inaccuracy. Compared to the millions of other problems and dissatisfactions in your life, sex is of little relevance, would be more inaccurate. But a person who, given the right partner, no medical issues, no issues with self-esteem/pride/etc., i.e. "perfect conditions for wanting sex" still would choose not to have sex ever, IMO definitely would be asexual.

[Dawnsboyrich]

No, that person would be celibate. I think.

So many terms.

The point is, I am trying to show mySo (NursingGirl) that I don't need sex to be happy in our relationship.

Really,I'd like to know some things other people do to show how much they live their other half without it being sex.

[Kaven]

Before I understood I was asexual, and I dated people who were sexual, some would break up with you after three dates if you weren't having sex. That's one kind of sexual person who sees the sexual relationship and being the foundation for a romantic one. If someone is asexual, and dates someone for years without sex, or infrequent sex... they are dating a different kind of sexual person. So 'sexuals' exist on a continuum too.

I do agree that if you identify as asexual, it's important to bring that up early in a relationship, and date those who are compatible. But that's true of many things that are deal breakers in relationships like desire to have/not have children. Unfortunately, people aren't always really cognizant of these things when they get into a relationship. I had a friend who divorced because she wanted children and he absolutely did not... but it wasn't until they were married and together a long time that they realized this was a deal breaker for them.

So applying ideal reality (people should disclose early in a relationship/look for someone compatible) to people who are already in relationships and discovering themselves just doesn't work.

[Guest]

There we go again, Humantoafault: you describe yourself as "not very sexual". Whatever that means. You don't even know because you put two question marks. Who are you to decide that "not all sexuals necessarily..."? You don't have a clue. That's all I'm saying. You are not really helping asexuals because they can feel you are talking as though you knew what it means to be a sexual who is frustrated by a sexless marriage that lasts for many years when you don't know what you are talking about and don't even know who you are. So focus on what you can do to help them, not what you can do to fight against sexuals.

I never claimed to be giving advice on relationships, since for starters I've never been in one. I am definitely sexual (the question mark is only in regards to a specific, unimportant label), but since I have never been in a relationship I have no knowledge to offer.

My point is only this: not everyone experiences the same level of sexuality. Sexuals can be highly sexual, or they can have a low level of desire...but in either case, the desire is still there, and that's what makes them sexual. I'm not fighting against anything, I'm only saying please do not assume everyone is like you. And if someone cannot handle a mixed relationship...I'm not criticizing that, I'm sure it's a rough place to be in. But if someone says they are happy in a mixed relationship, it's rather rude to keep on insisting that they cannot be. You get me?

[Guest]

No, that person would be celibate. I think.

So many terms.

The point is, I am trying to show mySo (NursingGirl) that I don't need sex to be happy in our relationship.

Really,I'd like to know some things other people do to show how much they live their other half without it being sex.

My ex and I did not have sex for most of our relationship (we did nearer the end, but my inexperience + thinking he wanted it all the time actually made it kinda stressful cause he thought I offered too much, since he has a lower libido). And note, he's an ex because of life differences (different countries, which flying over there all the time was expensive and he started to get heavily into the club scene for the music, which I am not a club goer), had nothing to do with sex.

Some things that we did together:

Cuddling

Kissing

Naked Cuddling

Long walks together, just talking

Shared hobbies

Things that really made me adore him was the fact he never, ever pushed me for sex. One time earlier in I offered and he said we should wait, because he didn't want what we were doing (kissing and stuff) to make me feel like I had to, he wanted to know for sure I wanted to, so preferred I tell him it was OK when it wasn't "in the heat of the moment" (we had already had a lengthy discussion about how I did NOT want to). He was 100% respectful of the fact I did not and everything he did just reassured me he really was. There was no arguing over sex, there was no feeling of pressure. I didn't really feel guilty about it, because he always made it feel like he really was just perfectly happy to cuddle instead, even though he did want sex. I always felt completely comfortable and completely safe in his arms, even when he was sexually frustrated, because he in no way took that out on me.

With my current, if we haven't had sex within a day or so there is noticeable tension. He's stressed and his behavior becomes more difficult to predict. He becomes angry easier. And he tends to pull away, talks less, plays games less (we're gamers), etc. Even on days we've agreed are no-sex, so he doesn't ask, the fact he wants to ask is just everywhere. There is no way to NOT have it in my face all the time. That comfort level about non-sexual interaction just does not exist.

Now, that's my experience in what makes me feel better about what THEY are like and what things they can do to reassure me. But, a lot of the guilt and stuff is internal. The knowledge they do want sex and you cannot satisfy that is gonna make a person feel guilty a lot of the times, even with a totally understanding / reassuring partner. I say I didn't really feel guilty about it with my ex, but to clarify, I did a little... just not anywhere near as bad. That's why I offered earlier, before I was ready. I loved him more for saying no, because I really hadn't wanted to, I just felt bad not doing it for him. And I offered sometimes out of what I felt was obligation after we began having sex. But, even when we got to the point we were, he was able to read my body language and if he felt I was uncomfortable, he'd suggest stopping and cuddling instead. So, he didn't allow me really to feel too bad, because he was just constantly showing me in every way he could how much he respected my feelings on it. But, I doubt you'll ever remove that little nagging doubt your wife has saying "I am not enough", that's on her and it's internal. Society bombards us with "have frequent sex to have a happy relationship", friends will offer that advice, family will tell you that if you don't then your man will cheat and everything else. It's something she's going to have to push aside herself, if you truly are happy with how your relationship is. And it's hard to push those doubts, fears and guilt away completely.

But, to the OPs partner: He is fully able to make his own decisions. In the same way it's awesome for him to respect your feelings, you have to respect his. If he tells you he feels you are more important to him than sex, then respect that. It's his decision to make, not yours to make for him based on what you think he would be happier with. :)

[Autumn Season]

I agree with Serran. :) Not being pushed for sex in itself is actually already a wonderful thing. I once dated this sweet person, with whom I could do anything: Talk for hours, go on dates, joke around, cuddle, share our worries... We could even talk about sex comfortably, completely accepting the other person's (non-)sexual feelings. It is true that I was happy because there was no pressure and because it was obvious that we both enjoyed spending time together. It was obvious since he smiled, was relaxed and looked forward to do yet another activity with me. ^^

[Tarfeather]

No, that person would be celibate. I think.

A celibate is a person who makes a choice to forego their desire for sex in order to achieve some other (often conscious) goal. If it's not a "sacrifice" of any kind for them, they are asexual.

[Guest]

No, that person would be celibate. I think.

A celibate is a person who makes a choice to forego their desire for sex in order to achieve some other (often conscious) goal. If it's not a "sacrifice" of any kind for them, they are asexual.

Well, your example was perfect conditions met, still would choose no sex - which then what "perfect conditions" are is subjective. One condition that stops people is choosing to be celibate - even if everything else is perfect, they are at peace with themselves, in love with their partner, etc. So, I think you're both right, in a way. You just are probably thinking of different scenarios. :) You can still give up what many would call "perfect condition" sex due to a vow of celibacy. But, a vow of celibacy in itself would be a condition that would block it, so what many would call perfect isn't really due to that.

[Tarfeather]

Well, your example was perfect conditions met, still would choose no sex - which then what "perfect conditions" are is subjective. One condition that stops people is choosing to be celibate - even if everything else is perfect, they are at peace with themselves, in love with their partner, etc. So, I think you're both right, in a way. You just are probably thinking of different scenarios. :) You can still give up what many would call "perfect condition" sex due to a vow of celibacy. But, a vow of celibacy in itself would be a condition that would block it, so what many would call perfect isn't really due to that.

I didn't mean "perfect conditions" quite that literally. I just meant a situation where there's literally nothing in the way of having sex, except one's own lack of desire. I think any sexual would wish to have sex at least sometimes in that situation. I wasn't implying that one can't subjectively consider a situation perfect in which they are celibate.

[Telecaster68]

My experience matches the various asexual people's (and it's not often I get to say that), when it comes to what makes things better. Basically, taking expectations of sex helped both of us, though it's still there underneath somewhere. It's just not about anything more than us not having sex, there's no feeling of rejection on my side, and less pressure in hers. That's not to say I don't crave it, I just don't expect it and I've shut up about it. We still have have some sexualish activity, initiated by her, about once a month. I'm not sure how long it's sustainable though.

Other than that, we make a point of doing more stuff together rather than letting life get in the way, which also helps.

A side comment: yes, 'some' sexuals are fine with no sex, in the sense that anything more than 'none' is 'some'. I do get the impression that asexuals can be over optimistic about how many that 'some' might be though.

[Guest]

Yeah, even as a "not very sexual" sexual am not sure how I'd do in a sexless marriage. I'd be willing to try for the sake of my partner, of course, but it wouldn't be ideal.

[Telecaster68]

Oh, and

"It seems to me the issue is assuming a romantic relationship... "

We're married. It seemed a fair assumption.

" ... and then being trapped in a constant contradiction of essential aspects of what you consider "romantic" to be missing."

Well, me, along with thousands of years of culture, the church, the law, and 99% of the population consider to be essential. I don't mean to be invalidating here but the expectation that sex is part of a marriage isn't just some random minority whim.

"It would seem less hurtful to me to assume a friendship and take anything additional (like cuddling, etc.) as "unexpected benefit", not as confirmation of romantic relationship status."

Which is essentially the only possible way to stay together and sane, and what is effectively happening. By most people's lights though it doesn't fit the bill of marriage - doesn't mean it won't work out, just let's recognise it's not what most people would expect in a marriage.

"But then again, for monogamous couples that's harder I guess, because for them... "

Us and thousands of years of culture, the church, the law, and 99% of the population ...

"there is some fundamental difference between romantic relationship and friendship."

Yes. Sex.

I don't mean to be curt btw, but I'm on a tablet which is painful for typing on - I'm a touch typist. I basically agree with you, but I wanted to unpack a few assumptions in your wording.