Jump to content

How To Have Sex With an Asexual (article)


Guest

Recommended Posts

butterflydreams

This article was actually the thing that made me give asexuality a second thought after dismissing it the first time. It seemed to describe how I thought I'd feel in that kind of situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw it when Hadley linked it. Almost puked.

I have a much better guide:

Step #1: Don't be an asshole.

... oh. That's it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... we live in a world with lots and lots of "assholes" in it, Tar. A detailed guide on the intricacies of your One-Step-Program can't hurt.

Yeah I've seen it and I bitched about it years ago. I really hate that article for many, many reasons.

Okay, now I'm curious (I always get curious when you and I really strongly disagree, Skulls... and this here seems near 180°.) Care to elaborate?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish that it were merely a guide on not being an asshole, but it's not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My issues with it in a very general sense are: (1) asexuals aren't scared baby raccoons, they're humans who should have the ability to communicate and interact with the world like normal people; (2) no one ever owes anyone sex, ever. Very little in that article should be asexual specific, despite it being discussed as though only asexuals have the right to say no to sexuals; (3) it characterizes sexuals as horrible rapists; (4) it completely ignores interpersonal communication styles and the (gasp!) possibility that sexuals come in a variety of personalities and that you could have one outgoing, gregarious, good communicator asexual and one shy, tentative, slow-going sexual; and (4) I take huge umbrage with the statement that if you didn't overtly ask and receive a "yes", then you've just raped someone.

Basically, I don't think we need yet another piece portraying sexuals as sex monsters who are happy to rape each other, while portraying asexuals as frail, fragile, confused, non-social weirdos who don't understand human interaction and can't make their preferences clear without Anne Sullivan-style guidance from sexuals.

Link to post
Share on other sites
butterflydreams

Yeah, I have to say that years later, I was far less enthused about it. I think at the time I was just amazed that I had any expectation that someone else had a responsibility to care about my feelings if we were in an intimate situation. Before that, I thought I'd have to suck it up and be uncomfortable and I had no choice. That article made me feel like I could say "no".

I think now, looking at the article, it's not really what I would give to someone wishing to have sex with me. I'm not a delicate eggshell that has to be coddled. Like Tar said, don't be an asshole is a hell of a first step. I guess looking at it now, there's a bit more infantilization than I'm comfortable with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thanks, Skulls. [/sincerity mode]

The only thing I could start to argue against would be your point 2), but I'll decline... especially as there are four others that don't make me go "yes, but", and instead "huh... interesting".

:cake:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm very interested in your thoughts on #2... I'm assuming there's something about the asexual experience that I'm not understanding, in that case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's mostly a matter of "some things are always rude, but that doesn't invalidate that they are especially rude to certain groups of people who already get confronted with that thing far more often than a regular guy".

An example made on that same blog somewhere else: You should, indeed, not ask anyone randomly (an obvious exception would be someone you're planning to have sex with) what kinda genitals are in their pants - it's always out of line. But you should especially not ask that question two seconds after someone tells you they're trans* or NB. You're likely to be the 437th random acquaintance to ask that exact rude question to a trans* person; whereas you'd likely be the first one ever to ask it of a cis person. One is a random wacko being rude; the other is contributing to a pattern of rudeness that has already been in place.

Or, for an example that's likely to be familiar to you, as a gay gal - "how does that even work, you and your partner having sex?" Random weirdness to ask a straight gal, she'll shake that oddball question off. For a Lesbian? Quite different weight to it, even though, "objectively", the same question is equally rude in both cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,, so I assumed that was going to be the response, and I completely agree with you as you've phrased things. However. What is continuously being highlighted in that article is "asexuals don't owe you sex" and "asexuals don't understand non-verbal sexual communication" and "asexuals will freeze and fail to say no".

Those aren't questions, those are actions. Serious actions, when we're talking about sexual assault, coercion, and rape. Suggesting that it's somehow worse to rape an asexual, or suggesting that sexuals don't have any of those issues, is really wrong to me.

Like, I'm sexual, yeah? I remember this one time, I was young and sexy and hot and so was my gay boy friend, and we decided to flirt with this cute straight boy in hopes he'd agree to make out with my friend. He did, they did, etc etc. Well, dude got hammered that night and felt icky about his gay kiss, so at about 3 AM he decided to come into my dorm and shove his cock down my throat.

I'm not asexual, but surely, SURELY, I also don't owe that dude sex, right? And also, despite being sexual, I'm prone to freezing in uncomfortable sexual situations, right? So why, then, are we teaching people to only give a fuck about asexuals' sexual autonomy???

Link to post
Share on other sites

My issues with it in a very general sense are: (1) asexuals aren't scared baby raccoons, they're humans who should have the ability to communicate and interact with the world like normal people; (2) no one ever owes anyone sex, ever. Very little in that article should be asexual specific, despite it being discussed as though only asexuals have the right to say no to sexuals; (3) it characterizes sexuals as horrible rapists; (4) it completely ignores interpersonal communication styles and the (gasp!) possibility that sexuals come in a variety of personalities and that you could have one outgoing, gregarious, good communicator asexual and one shy, tentative, slow-going sexual; and (4) I take huge umbrage with the statement that if you didn't overtly ask and receive a "yes", then you've just raped someone.

Basically, I don't think we need yet another piece portraying sexuals as sex monsters who are happy to rape each other, while portraying asexuals as frail, fragile, confused, non-social weirdos who don't understand human interaction and can't make their preferences clear without Anne Sullivan-style guidance from sexuals.

Wow, even I can't deny that you hit the nail on the head here, Skullery. Like, scary amount of precision going on in your illustration. And I do mean this sincerely.

...

I'm really confused now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's mostly a matter of "some things are always rude, but that doesn't invalidate that they are especially rude to certain groups of people who already get confronted with that thing far more often than a regular guy".

An example made on that same blog somewhere else: You should, indeed, not ask anyone randomly (an obvious exception would be someone you're planning to have sex with) what kinda genitals are in their pants - it's always out of line. But you should especially not ask that question two seconds after someone tells you they're trans* or NB. You're likely to be the 437th random acquaintance to ask that exact rude question to a trans* person; whereas you'd likely be the first one ever to ask it of a cis person. One is a random wacko being rude; the other is contributing to a pattern of rudeness that has already been in place.

Or, for an example that's likely to be familiar to you, as a gay gal - "how does that even work, you and your partner having sex?" Random weirdness to ask a straight gal, she'll shake that oddball question off. For a Lesbian? Quite different weight to it, even though, "objectively", the same question is equally rude in both cases.

Well, I'll address not just this point, but the the tone behind this point, which is also present in the linked article.

Essentially, your personal preferences don't translate into moral guidelines for everyone. We all have different personalities, different ways of thinking and acting, different ways we engage others. I don't ever ask myself "Would it be rude / immoral to say / do such and such?". I ask myself whether it would be a genuine expression of myself. And I've found that the more I do that, the more honestly I express myself toward those who matter in my life, the better my relationships work.

Maybe you, personally, would not like to be asked about sex, or hear about my sexual desires. But that just plain means that you and I are incompatible as partners (which we already established). Meanwhile C., who is also asexual, has absolutely no issue with being asked about sex, or hearing about how I desire her. She's also fine with me initiating certain intimate acts, and stopping me if she doesn't want it. She never held it against me that I asked her "rude" questions like whether she masturbated, even before we were in a relationship. She has said "no" to sex in the past, but it was never an indication that I'm not allowed to bring up sex ever again.

She does think that she "owes" me sexual intimacy, and I actually disagree with her on that; However, I have a right to disagree with her, as I'm her partner. No random person on the internet has a right to dictate to my partner what she should feel that she "owes" in a relationship, asexual or no. She never considered anything she did for me as "capitulation", as quite frankly, she's a stubborn person who never capitulates, especially not on a matter like this.

My verdict: I wouldn't get near the author of this article with a 10-foot pole, much less consider dating them. Their preferences and expectations in a partner may be fine for themselves, but they sure as hell aren't representative of all asexuals, or what would be good practice for all sexuals when trying to engage those asexuals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Essentially, your personal preferences don't translate into moral guidelines for everyone. We all have different personalities, different ways of thinking and acting, different ways we engage others. I don't ever ask myself "Would it be rude / immoral to say / do such and such?". I ask myself whether it would be a genuine expression of myself. And I've found that the more I do that, the more honestly I express myself toward those who matter in my life, the better my relationships work.

Which is a serious difference between us. I do ask myself that, Tar. Con. Stant. Ly. And I forbid myself any expression of myself in a social context, no matter how "genuine" it may have been, that does not pass the "ethical filter" (at least as long as I don't have a class III angry meltdown... which happens rarely indeed*, but which I deeply regret when it does -_- ).

E.g., for some of the - rare - moments I had issues within the relationship with R., I would not talk with her about it. I would think about it myself, I would pray, and I would talk to my socped. As long as I consider it a problem of my own, I'd rate it as my ethical duty ot to bother her with it, and would see myself as a bad partner if I spoke out unneccessarily and selfishly.

I honestly would not be able to live with myself if I didn't censor myself. I can't be trusted without my brain having a foot planted firmly on the brake of heart and guts, at all time.

* Nowadays, at least. You would not have liked teenage me. Noone liked teenage me, and for damn good reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's right to do/say whatever you want to do/say just because it's an "genuine expression" of oneself. Other people matter too, and if your genuine expression will needlessly hurt someone, or if your genuine expression is outside of the boundaries of your right to infringe on another, then it's wrong to so express.

It's possible that different personalities of people see these situations differently. I'm with Mysti in that I absolutely must censor myself near-constantly because I am an extreme person in opinion and emotion. Very little of what goes thru my head ever comes out my mouth.

EDIT: There's another thing I agree with Mysti on, and it's something I think we may be in the minority about... but I think it's coercion to mention problems to your partner. Sometimes the coercion is justified... if they're really doing something hurtful... but mostly, telling your partner that there's something they do that you don't like, makes you jealous, hurts your feelings, etc, is emotional blackmail. The other person then has to change who they are as a person or get into a fight with you, and IMO it's almost always wrong to put that burden on another person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible that different personalities of people see these situations differently. I'm with Mysti in that I absolutely must censor myself near-constantly because I am an extreme person in opinion and emotion. Very little of what goes thru my head ever comes out my mouth.

Heh. Which is especially funny seeing as from over here in Mysti-Town, Skullsville still comes across as "vehement freedom of expression FUCK YEAH!" :lol:

I guess in Tar City it's, well, anarchy. Pure, unbridled anarchy. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

A genuine expression of yourself, is not the same as saying whatever comes to mind. There is a really, really significant difference. And yes, I have only been starting to understand this myself lately, and hearing the opinions of AVENites helped me come to this understanding.

To put it bluntly, if I went out there and told a random woman I wanted to sleep with her, sure that would be an accurate description of what's going on with me. But it wouldn't, necessarily, be an expression of my self. In order to get to that self-expression, a whole range of things is required. I have to understand who I am, where I put myself in relation to this other person I'm talking to, how I judge myself and my own impulses. Maybe then I can start relating how I feel to this person. Or maybe not. Maybe coming to this kind of understanding, I've decided that I don't want to tell this woman that. Not because of some "filtering" or "social rules", but simply because I genuinely don't want to.

It's the same with my partner. When I tell her that I desire her, it's not foremost an expression of my impulses. It's not a demand that she give me the sex. It's a truth about myself, that I relate to her, in the context of our relationship, in the context of how we feel about each other.

As for complaining to another person.. Honestly, usually it's not a good sign, but if this never happened, the relationship would seem kind of eerily peaceful and happy? When I quarrel with my partner, the result is usually that neither of us budges an inch, but then afterward we're both really sorry for not having accepted each other to begin with. Coming to terms with each other, is kind of nice honestly, and in the grand scheme of things probably more proof that the relationship is alive and breathing than anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're talking about tact vs self-expression. Im really bad at the first one, as in I have no tact.

Unfortunantly I don't practice self expression either.

I need to use more tact. However I also need to express myself more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
but mostly, telling your partner that there's something they do that you don't like, makes you jealous, hurts your feelings, etc, is emotional blackmail. The other person then has to change who they are as a person or get into a fight with you

I don't think it's an either/or though. The thing that's really hurting you when they do it, could easily be something that costs them absolutely nothing to stop doing - they may not even realise they're doing it. So sitting on it is just going to lead you to be more and more hurt and possibly resentful and martyrish, when they would have been perfectly happy to stop it, if they knew. And if you were doing something that you didn't realise, or something that you really didn't care about stopping, that pissed your partner off, would you want them to sit on it forever too?

In the end, for anything that isn't ultimately going to be fatal to you as a couple, the best solution is the one that minimises the aggregate pissed-offness in the relationship as a whole. In other words, the one who change pisses off the least - especially when there's some compromise over the amount of change - should be willing to change for the sake of the relationship. That should just be an ongoing, two way thing across all sorts of areas.

It's not about morality or power or anything particularly theoretical, just pragmatism. If there's something that you can't either let go, give up, or compromise on then it's going to be a dealbreaker, and that's fine too. But sitting on your discontents is really not going work.

(And Skulls... a few days ago you posted about how every few months, you had a version of The Talk with your partner. Isn't that doing exactly what you're saying is coercive now?)

Same with saying what 's on your mind. Generally my thought process is "There's [thing I want to say]. Is it reasonable to say it? Will it help? What's the most helpful way I can put it out there?". It's not all or nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the thing is, in order to be what I truly consider myself, I need time away from people, sealed up in my head, pondering rules and ethics. Sad as it may sound to anyone even remotely extraverted - social interaction before that would end up being deeply tainted with defense mechanisms, and particularly those that are destructive. I just don't want that (at least not from people who aren't recompensed to sit through it, like my psych or my socped).

The true self is, for me, what remains after sifting, discarding, sifting again, pondering a while, and sifting a third time just to be sure no dirt remains. All the dirt is part of my neurotic shell, not part of my self.

(How the frickin frack did this thread suddenly end up this deeply personality philosophical?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
butterflydreams

Largely agree with what people have said here.

All sexuals aren't morons who will progress into "rapey" territory if not otherwise instructed. That's a silly (and offensive) assertion to make.

I guess my approach would be to make sure that you did the right pre-game planning. I think that's something I've learned in trans circles. Establish what kinds of things are ok/not ok in advance. Because especially with trans people, it might not be obvious at all. Just open communication, "I'm super uncomfortable being touched there, or in that way, but I can and like to do all these other things".

I don't really have many expectations of a sexual partner, but it would be very important to me to take steps necessary to minimize dysphoria, which might be very near redline in a sexual encounter. That's ultimately my biggest concern personally. But with someone who I've trusted enough to get that far, it shouldn't be a problem.

Maybe that's it. Maybe this article is operating under the assumption of having casual sex with asexuals. If that were the scenario, I'd say yeah, maybe her advice is right. But how many aces out there are into casual sex?

Link to post
Share on other sites

(How the frickin frack did this thread suddenly end up this deeply personality philosophical?)

Eh, that is nothing. Riddle me this one: How can I possibly agree with every single post here, you, Skullery, Telecaster, Hadley.. OK, not Hadley, I always agree with Hadley.. but it's just.. what?! We're not supposed to agree with each other here, that's not what this discussion board is for. ._.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...would it be wrong of me to say the best way to have sex with an asexual is to just get with an asexual? They want sex like anyone else right? They lack *attraction* but they're still human and want sex... according to plenty of asexuals anyway...

*sigh*

I read the article and the bit that got me was how the author was saying some asexuals can enthusiastically want sex because I felt that was giving sexuals false hope... then I remembered that yeah apparently lots of asexuals *do* enthusiastically want sex so..whatever. meh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Maybe this article is operating under the assumption of having casual sex with asexuals.

It kind of says that at the start (something about it not being about people in an existing relationship) but then contradicts itself later on. It's one of the many bad things about the article. I read it ages ago too, and assumed it was mostly aimed at young bloods who'd copped off with an asexual and thought some snogging meant it was business as usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to say right now that if/when I ever do have sex, if I throughaly enjoy it and want to go do it again, or even if I just want to do it again, or I want to have it in a relationship. I will be making a coming out as allo thread, lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the thing is, in order to be what I truly consider myself, I need time away from people, sealed up in my head, pondering rules and ethics. Sad as it may sound to anyone even remotely extraverted - social interaction before that would end up being deeply tainted with defense mechanisms, and particularly those that are destructive. I just don't want that (at least not from people who aren't recompensed to sit through it, like my psych or my socped).

The true self is, for me, what remains after sifting, discarding, sifting again, pondering a while, and sifting a third time just to be sure no dirt remains. All the dirt is part of my neurotic shell, not part of my self.

No offense meant, Mysti.. But this sounds like exactly the experience of someone who's denying themselves deep down, and who needs to continuously make a conscious effort to repress that self. And I don't necessarily mean this as criticism, because sometimes being yourself is simply not possible in this society. Personally I've simply made a choice of prioritizing myself over society's ideas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...