How big a deal is sex in a relationship?

[Lord Jade Cross]

Keep in mind as well that there is a wide range of variation in how important sex is to sexuals, both from person to person and within the same person at different stages of life. They're far from uniform in needs and desires. How could 99% of people not be diverse?

Its because sometimes, people themselves make it sound like they arent diverse. Saying that sex is mandatory and necessary for 99% of the population gives it less a diverse feeling to it more like a type of law feeling to it.

Sex isn't "mandatory" for sexual people. It's a necessity, perhaps, but "mandatory" makes it sound so institutional and enforced.

And sex isn't a single activity. It's a wide category of things. There's room for type of sexual activity and there's variation in amount. I don't see where acknowledging that 99% of people have (partnered) sexual needs lumps them together as one type. Some sexual people might want to make it sound like they're all the same to pressure an asexual person onto fulfilling their needs, but those sexual people are exceptional assholes.

and yet we often hear of such cases.

This is where I say that it seems like a partner being superior in sense of fulfillment over a friend sounds like an ideology

Hahah, my experience is actually the opposite. People always claiming how important friends are due to ideological reasons, then treating their friends like shit for their partner's sake.It really isn't about ideology, even though it's something like it. What this is really about are conditioned psychological needs. Ever heard the term "daddy issues"? That kind of thing, basically. If you grow up in a family where you come to expect a certain configuration, it'll be much easier reproducing the same configuration in a relationship than in a friendship, as any sane person will not allow a messed up friendship, but a lot of people stick out pretty terrible relationships.

Keep in mind as well that there is a wide range of variation in how important sex is to sexuals, both from person to person and within the same person at different stages of life. They're far from uniform in needs and desires. How could 99% of people not be diverse?

Its because sometimes, people themselves make it sound like they arent diverse. Saying that sex is mandatory and necessary for 99% of the population gives it less a diverse feeling to it more like a type of law feeling to it.

Well, 100% of people need to eat. What does this have to do with diversity?

Not sure I understand where the question is to lead. Can you rephrase it?

The fact that nearly everyone requires sex doesn't reduce diversity any more than the fact that everyone needs to eat does. What you say is like some alien complaining "Feh, humans. ALL of them eat food! How boring and monotone is that! Can't some of them eat rocks or something?"

Im on the other emd of that spectrum as taking imto account my family, Id rather be dead first than to run the risk of there being a reproduction of familiar patterns. Psychological destructive patterns are not appealing to me.

[Snao Cone]

Keep in mind as well that there is a wide range of variation in how important sex is to sexuals, both from person to person and within the same person at different stages of life. They're far from uniform in needs and desires. How could 99% of people not be diverse?

Its because sometimes, people themselves make it sound like they arent diverse. Saying that sex is mandatory and necessary for 99% of the population gives it less a diverse feeling to it more like a type of law feeling to it.

Sex isn't "mandatory" for sexual people. It's a necessity, perhaps, but "mandatory" makes it sound so institutional and enforced.

And sex isn't a single activity. It's a wide category of things. There's room for type of sexual activity and there's variation in amount. I don't see where acknowledging that 99% of people have (partnered) sexual needs lumps them together as one type. Some sexual people might want to make it sound like they're all the same to pressure an asexual person onto fulfilling their needs, but those sexual people are exceptional assholes.

and yet we often hear of such cases.

We're going to hear more about the exceptional assholes than the regular ones, right? :lol:

[Lord Jade Cross]

Wait how did the quout pick that last line o.o? I was responding to the friendship thing.

[Tarfeather]

Im on the other emd of that spectrum as taking imto account my family, Id rather be dead first than to run the risk of there being a reproduction of familiar patterns. Psychological destructive patterns are not appealing to me.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure nobody does this on purpose. Now this is taking a dip into psychology, but many people actually swing into the opposite extreme because they think that way they can escape the pattern. In reality, though, they still perpetuate it.

[Lord Jade Cross]

Keep in mind as well that there is a wide range of variation in how important sex is to sexuals, both from person to person and within the same person at different stages of life. They're far from uniform in needs and desires. How could 99% of people not be diverse?

Its because sometimes, people themselves make it sound like they arent diverse. Saying that sex is mandatory and necessary for 99% of the population gives it less a diverse feeling to it more like a type of law feeling to it.

Sex isn't "mandatory" for sexual people. It's a necessity, perhaps, but "mandatory" makes it sound so institutional and enforced.

And sex isn't a single activity. It's a wide category of things. There's room for type of sexual activity and there's variation in amount. I don't see where acknowledging that 99% of people have (partnered) sexual needs lumps them together as one type. Some sexual people might want to make it sound like they're all the same to pressure an asexual person onto fulfilling their needs, but those sexual people are exceptional assholes.

and yet we often hear of such cases.

We're going to hear more about the exceptional assholes than the regular ones, right? :lol:

unfortunately

Im on the other emd of that spectrum as taking imto account my family, Id rather be dead first than to run the risk of there being a reproduction of familiar patterns. Psychological destructive patterns are not appealing to me.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure nobody does this on purpose. Now this is taking a dip into psychology, but many people actually swing into the opposite extreme because they think that way they can escape the pattern. In reality, though, they still perpetuate it.

Patterns can be broken. Its just that for most people, this takes a great deal of observation and behavior altering (sort of like CBT) and alot of people wont do that.

[Telecaster68]

"This is where I say that it seems like a partner being superior in sense of fulfillment over a friend sounds like an ideology"

We weren't talking about that, we were talking about why sex is part of a marriage-esque relationship.

[Lady Girl]

"This is where I say that it seems like a partner being superior in sense of fulfillment over a friend sounds like an ideology"

We weren't talking about that, we were talking about why sex is part of a marriage-esque relationship.

Even as part of the conversation, I don't think the partner aspects were made to sound superior over a friendship, just different.

As for the sex being part of a marriage. Most of the time it simply is. There are times when it isn't though and sometimes one partner may really miss it and other times neither will. I think it all depends on the people and the circumstances.

[Vixrotre]

I would break up with someone if they wouldn't want to have sex ever, with definition of "sex" wider than PiV. The thing is that when I'm not physically satified I get nervous, anxious and really moody, so even if I'd try to accept it and deal with it I could not stop thinking about it and get pissed for no reason, so our relationship would turn either in constant fights or in constant avoidance. I have a high libido and a low self esteem so I'd just be depressed and sexually frustrated.

[Tarfeather]

I have a high libido and a low self esteem so I'd just be depressed and sexually frustrated.

Welcome to the club, friend. Can't say I have any options than to suck it up, though.

[HanBanan]

It's a pretty big deal to me. I am frequently desirous of physical affection, and can get lost simply in the thought of kissing someone. I can't wait to share that feeling with someone, and to have that feeling brushed aside with a little peck or a brief hug feels like rejection. And it's not pleasant to feel frequently rejected by someone you know to love you. But it doesn't stop the feeling. Every kiss, every touch that is brushed aside or not returned feels just a little like a slap in the face.

It hurts my heart to think that my husband feels this way about physical/sexual affection, but I know that he does. Thank you for being brutally honest with this. I need the reminder, sometimes, that what seems like nothing to me really feels like continuous rejection, to him. Thank you for sharing

[Sally]

As for the sex being part of a marriage. Most of the time it simply is.

Yup. And when it is, there's no point in arguing or trying to explain why it shouldn't be.

[cupid69]

While I have tried to understand this, I never really got the whole point of the sex being a necessity if other aspects of the relationship are at top shape.

I also have to agree and cant understand the difference between close friend and partner as a partner would be the closests friend one has. And sex (if it were absolutely necessary) could be achieved with a friend just like a partner. The difference would be what emotions would be attributed and that makes it sounds like its more of a matter of ideology than anything else. Or at least that's how I understand it.

Sex only becomes or can become a problem if one of the partners in a relationship desires it and the other doesn't. There wouldn't be a forum if nobody desired sex, and the human race would eventually die out. This is surely obvious!

Not sure what you mean by 'sex being absolutely necessary'? Sex between couples is a furtherment of a desire brought about by chemicals in the brain. These chemicals are stimulated by emotions, many not yet understood. These emotions have been within the human condition for millions of years.......just look at how the world population is increasing! Where does the ideology come from?

[Lord Jade Cross]

While I have tried to understand this, I never really got the whole point of the sex being a necessity if other aspects of the relationship are at top shape.

I also have to agree and cant understand the difference between close friend and partner as a partner would be the closests friend one has. And sex (if it were absolutely necessary) could be achieved with a friend just like a partner. The difference would be what emotions would be attributed and that makes it sounds like its more of a matter of ideology than anything else. Or at least that's how I understand it.

Sex only becomes or can become a problem if one of the partners in a relationship desires it and the other doesn't. There wouldn't be a forum if nobody desired sex, and the human race would eventually die out. This is surely obvious!

Not sure what you mean by 'sex being absolutely necessary'? Sex between couples is a furtherment of a desire brought about by chemicals in the brain. These chemicals are stimulated by emotions, many not yet understood. These emotions have been within the human condition for millions of years.......just look at how the world population is increasing! Where does the ideology come from?

Look at the above posts.

[closetPonyfan]

I haven't been able to access the site for a while so I fell out of the conversations but I have a few things that might be worth sharing. First thank you to apostle for his post about how ultimately sexual attraction is a chemical reaction. That didnt seem to be received popularly by some but ultimately it is indisputably true. And I think it'll bring peace of mind to anyone on a mixed relationship struggling with the questions of "why doesn't my partner love me like I love them" or "how can I show them how much I care about them, when they don't understand how" literally it's all chemistry.

Knowing that doesn't necessarily solve any problems though, but maybe it can help you get through the day, or another week, and also to better appreciate what you do get out of your relationship.

I think it's another thing that should be mentioned and kept in mind for anyone reading through this forum, that hetero, monogomystic relationships aren't the only ones that do (or dont) involve sex. And when trying to understand someone else's perspective you have to know where they are at on the identy/orientation spectrum. Remember, not everyone agrees that sex is a romantic display of love between husband and wife. Though this much doesn't seem prevalent to the current discussion, just food for thought.

And for now the last thing I'll add to the discussion is that it cannot be said enough how important communication is. So many people come to this message board when they are scared, hurt, confused, angry, or feeling depressed. I admit that's why I first came to post anything here. And it's very helpful for people to have an outlet, and to know they aren't alone. But also remember that your partner <B> IS </B> in thus with you. And either they want to help make it work, or they want to agree that the incompatibility is reason enough to grow in sepereat directions. But no matter how much someone's story sounds just like yours, remember that their partner isn't yours. And you need to talk to them. Also it isn't a bad idea to talk to a therapist, either as a couple, or just on your own.

There's a lot more I'd like to hit in and talk about but this is getting long, and kinda scatter brained so I'll leave it at that. (cake) (if that didn't work *insert cake emote*)

[cupid69]

How are emotions ideological?

how else would you describe that a friend is not sexually desirable but a partner is. Subsequently why is a friend not emotionally deeply satisfying as a partner?

The same way a child or parent is not sexually desirable. There are all kinds of love relationships (friendship is often one too), that don't involve sexual feelings. It doesn't mean those relationships aren't emotionally deeply satisfying...it just means they don't have some of the emotions that are felt with a sexual relationship/partner.

This is not to say that a sexual person cannot feel emotionally satisfied with a partner if they don't have a sexual relationship; sometimes they can.

I think you'll find that the majority of sexuals cannot feel emotionally satisfied if they are not sexually satisfied. You only have to look in this website at those souls crying out for the need to connect with their loved one. Sexual attraction between two people is the basic building block of man/womenkind and without it we would not have any human beings. I think those sexuals who think they are perfectly satisfied not to have a sexual relationship may be denying themselves and are really asexuals.

[Telecaster68]

I think it's possible for some - probably few though - sexual to feel emotionally satisfied in a relationship with an asexual, in the sense they would be able to feel loved. I can't see how the lack of sex wouldn't continue to be painful though, even with plenty of other physical contact. To use the conversation analogy - if your partner had a stroke which changed their personality to the extent they no longer felt the need to have conversations, however much you sympathised and understood and felt loved, you'd still miss talking with them hugely. Of course the difference there is that no one would bat an eyelid when you went out for conversations with other people. They'd be encouraging you, in fact.

[Tarfeather]

First thank you to apostle for his post about how ultimately sexual attraction is a chemical reaction. That didnt seem to be received popularly by some but ultimately it is indisputably true.

We can try to reduce everything to its bare components and try to declare it as "just" those components, but that's failing to understand how the world works. Pain is "just a chemical reaction", so let's not be bothered by it, right? Sheesh. Open your eyes.

[closetPonyfan]

I don't mean don't be bothered by it, I just mean it helps to understand things better, at least for some people. Consider the person asking "What do they mean they love me but don't want sex? Attraction is the attraction, there aren't multiple kinds. And my attraction to them leads me to want sex. The fact that they don't clearly indicates to me they don't actually love me"

The counter point, which apostle was making, is that they do still love you, the attraction you feel is a mix of chemicals and they have many of the same things (feelings) going on for you. The difference is when your cuddling with them, and you get the impulse t take it further, their bodies literally don't create the same chemicals. They literally don't have that chemical cocktail going on, not because of lack of interest, but because it's how their brain chemistry has always been.

In other words, it isn't rejection at all, they just aren't getting the same high you are in that moment.

[Lady Girl]

How are emotions ideological?

how else would you describe that a friend is not sexually desirable but a partner is. Subsequently why is a friend not emotionally deeply satisfying as a partner?

The same way a child or parent is not sexually desirable. There are all kinds of love relationships (friendship is often one too), that don't involve sexual feelings. It doesn't mean those relationships aren't emotionally deeply satisfying...it just means they don't have some of the emotions that are felt with a sexual relationship/partner.

This is not to say that a sexual person cannot feel emotionally satisfied with a partner if they don't have a sexual relationship; sometimes they can.

I think you'll find that the majority of sexuals cannot feel emotionally satisfied if they are not sexually satisfied. You only have to look in this website at those souls crying out for the need to connect with their loved one. Sexual attraction between two people is the basic building block of man/womenkind and without it we would not have any human beings. I think those sexuals who think they are perfectly satisfied not to have a sexual relationship may be denying themselves and are really asexuals.

I am perfectly satisfied and nope, I'm not in denial (about being actually asexual myself). Believe me, I've thought about it. I think maybe my libido has subsided.

I think it's possible for some - probably few though - sexual to feel emotionally satisfied in a relationship with an asexual, in the sense they would be able to feel loved. I can't see how the lack of sex wouldn't continue to be painful though, even with plenty of other physical contact. To use the conversation analogy - if your partner had a stroke which changed their personality to the extent they no longer felt the need to have conversations, however much you sympathised and understood and felt loved, you'd still miss talking with them hugely. Of course the difference there is that no one would bat an eyelid when you went out for conversations with other people. They'd be encouraging you, in fact.

It doesn't continue to be painful. The closest thing I can compare it to for me is smoking...I loved smoking, but now I have no desire for it at. It's just not part of my life anymore.

[Telecaster68]

It doesn't continue to be painful. The closest thing I can compare it to for me is smoking...I loved smoking, but now I have no desire for it at. It's just not part of my life anymore.

Fair enough. I can't imagine ever having that degree of equanimity over not being desired by my partner, personally.

[closetPonyfan]

@telecaster

Yeah that's where I'm at to, but I yearn to. LG is a good source of inspiration and enlightenment into how to get to that point.

[Mercurial Daydream]

I try to imagine it's analogous to how I feel about non-sexual physical contact and basic affection.

First, I become rather clingy and unhappy and feel very rejected and hurt when these are absent from my life in general. I even get urges to self harm if it's really lacking with no end in sight. I think a significant portion of that intensity is due to neglect of this in my childhood, especially the early parts.

Second, when I feel particularly emotionally close to someone, the urge to touch and be physically close is frequent and if usually or always restrained, it feels painful and I start feeling that person doesn't care about me, even though that makes no sense. If I'm getting enough physical contact with others, I can generally shake off most of the anxiety this dynamic provokes. It is very easy for me to feel rejected though, even when I know the other person simply experiences touch very differently.

So far, it has been a consistently stressful dynamic for me when there is a big mismatch, and having come to the conclusion that such touch is a need for me, I'm coming to realize I need to start putting more energy into activities and relationships that meet this or I'll be a difficult person for everyone in my life, including those non-touchy relationships that I do very much value.

One person in my life is a nonlibidonist who likened her experience with touch to sex repulsed asexuality. This is someone I felt and feel very close to, but learning this was really painful and hard. For the first time, I felt I had an idea of what my ex wife felt regarding sexuality in my relationship with her. As I have a libido, I'd understood some of my ex's frustration, but never understood why it was directed at me. That is, I never understood why she wanted to have sex with me in particular, why my disinterest or refusal was so hard for her. But I guess I'm starting to understand, by analogy to the attractions I experience clearly and strongly. My ex, BTW, never did develop equinamity about it; she's now happily in a very sexual relationship, and I'm happily celibate. The mismatch between us was pretty extreme, and I think I only kept trying because I craved the physical contact so badly. In retrospect, I think we both were trying to get different needs met in unhealthy ways, but that wasn't clear all along; the sensual - sexual distinction was critical for me.

I'm delighted to see mixed relationships work out. I agree with others that it's not always realistic, but I think dealbreakers are idiosyncratic and always worthy of individual attention. I think the essential things are self awareness, honest communication, willingness to try to work it out, and willingness to face breaking up.

[Telecaster68]

Mercurial

Yeah, that sounds pretty much exactly what it's like.

[cupid69]

I don't mean don't be bothered by it, I just mean it helps to understand things better, at least for some people. Consider the person asking "What do they mean they love me but don't want sex? Attraction is the attraction, there aren't multiple kinds. And my attraction to them leads me to want sex. The fact that they don't clearly indicates to me they don't actually love me"

The counter point, which apostle was making, is that they do still love you, the attraction you feel is a mix of chemicals and they have many of the same things (feelings) going on for you. The difference is when your cuddling with them, and you get the impulse t take it further, their bodies literally don't create the same chemicals. They literally don't have that chemical cocktail going on, not because of lack of interest, but because it's how their brain chemistry has always been.

In other words, it isn't rejection at all, they just aren't getting the same high you are in that moment.

Yeah, I guess the word I was looking for that encompasses the chemical reaction is called 'libido'. I kind of figured this out many years ago that a persons 'libido' was measured on a scale..........high meant a keenness to take a relationship to another level (by that I mean actually having sex with a partner) and low meant ( for the 'regular person' ) having to try and figure out in which direction their relationship was going. I'm using the word 'regular' here as without 'sexuals' the world would come to an end. No offense meant to those who think of themselves as 'regular' but are not sexual. It's just the world we are in. I'm sure my wife thinks she is a regular person......she just has a very low libido. My loss sexually, and I have found it hard to bear. Also, to those who say that the solution is a compromise..........well yes it is...........a huge compromise on MY part, not hers. That's the way I feel and other people will feel differently but hey, you have to accept it and move on. I know one thing though............my strong religious beliefs have disappeared for sure. Why would a benign God bestow upon us such a complicated state of affairs?

[MacPopcorn]

Thanks for all your responses. As I said, the most important thing for me is the actual relationship between me and someone else I take on board all the things people say about different relationships having different dynamics. Things that turn me off are despite wanting me as a friend or as a boyfriend, they wouldn't make the effort to meet up with me and talk to me in an attempt to get to know me and develop a relationship with me. It's as if they expected me to do all the work in developing and maintaining a relationship with them even though I may not be sure what type of relationship I want and if it would be right for me. I remember being sitting beside a woman who wanted me as a boyfriend on a nights out and she chose to spend the night taking selfies and sending photos over snapchat and making posts on Facebook and made no effort to engage me in conversation and when she did choose to talk to me, all she did was moan and complain about her best friend being in a relationship and being single herself and talk about making out and having sex with strangers she met in nightclubs which didn't appeal to me what whatsoever. She didn't give me any attention and I think she wanted a boyfriend for the sake of having one so I would question how genuine her attraction for me was.

By in large, I tend too look for friendship and then it's just a matter of how close we become. I suppose I could have sex with a potential girlfriend but it would be more to satisfy them but I would have to be very comfortable and strong bond with her first as I have no interest in sexual acts, especially with strangers. I would want my girlfriend to essentially be a female BFF.

Obviously, open and honest communication between people is important for forming good healthy relationships and ensuring that both get on well or at lease don't upset or annoy each other. When people start bouncing around the issues instead of addressing them, relationships can blow up in your face and some compromise or at least some consideration for the other person is important but sometimes two people simply just aren't compatible and are better off as friends or casual acquaintances as opposed to being a couple.

I'm just trying to understand why sex is such a big deal when in my experience with friends and potential girlfriends is that they wouldn't even pick up the phone and ring for a chat let alone organised to meet up with me and do something like go to the cinema or whatever took our fancy and from what I could see, showed no genuine interest in actually developing a healthy happy relationship with me be it as a friend or a "partner".

[The Stranger]

If you're really trying to understand why sex is such a big deal for sexuals, imagine a relationship without communication. No, seriously, imagine it. You're sitting on a sofa and your wife/husband/partner is near you silently staring at TV. Day after day after day. You're trying to come up with topics, and your partner is either not replying, or replies with one or two emotionless words.

[Balding]

I don't think that an asexual can ever really understand the value or beauty of sex in a relationship.It is like trying to describe the nuances and gradations of a gorgeous rainbow or a sunset to somebody who is colour blind. Through no fault of their own, they will never see it as we do if they only see in tones of grey. ....Or perhaps even like trying to describe the fragrance of a rose to somebody without a sense of smell....the understanding will never be there no matter how prolific the explanation or how hard either side tries....my opinion at least

[Tarfeather]

I don't think that an asexual can ever really understand the value or beauty of sex in a relationship.It is like trying to describe the nuances and gradations of a gorgeous rainbow or a sunset to somebody who is colour blind. Through no fault of their own, they will never see it as we do if they only see in tones of grey. ....Or perhaps even like trying to describe the fragrance of a rose to somebody without a sense of smell....the understanding will never be there no matter how prolific the explanation or how hard either side tries....my opinion at least

Except that a rainbow will never have a value to a relationship, specifically. Nobody's going to say "You don't love me because you can't enjoy the colors of this rainbow."

[Telecaster68]

I don't think that an asexual can ever really understand the value or beauty of sex in a relationship.It is like trying to describe the nuances and gradations of a gorgeous rainbow or a sunset to somebody who is colour blind. Through no fault of their own, they will never see it as we do if they only see in tones of grey. ....Or perhaps even like trying to describe the fragrance of a rose to somebody without a sense of smell....the understanding will never be there no matter how prolific the explanation or how hard either side tries....my opinion at least

Except that a rainbow will never have a value to a relationship, specifically. Nobody's going to say "You don't love me because you can't enjoy the colors of this rainbow."

I don't think balding was extending the analogy that far, just pointing out there's an unbridgeable gap when it comes to desire.

[Nidwin]

We asexuals very stupid, not very intelligent as you allos. We not having big brain to understand how beautifull it all is.

aces = morons

Got it now. Thanks a lot.