Jump to content

Archived

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

touching-not-so-much

Why Do Sexuals Require SEX Specificially to Orgasm? Magic?

Recommended Posts

Blondbeard

This is something I posted once, from one POV, and was going to reply to a sexual about, but it would have been a little accusatory and wasn't really on topic.

"I love sex but I can't get my [x] to do it more than once a month."

I don't understand posts like this, from either side. If someone HAS to have an orgasm, whether it's five times a day or once a week or whatever, they CAN, and they don't even have to guilt or talk somebody into it.

The other person does not HOARD "the sex" - an individual is quite capable of having sexual release without anyone else. Yes sex is a shared experience, but it doesn't magically make an orgasm DIFFERENT. It makes me think of people that go into chatrooms and when nobody is talking about what THEY want to, they say "I'm bored". You're bored? Well, gee, how can we resolve this earth-shattering crisis. Let's see, have YOU brought up a topic? No? Then STFU.

Or is the sex ACTUALLY for the closeness and intimacy and contact with this person? So is this a failing of sexuals to be able to understand themselves, that they are craving intimacy and they're just conflating sex AS that.

Either way, I see this as sexuals doing a great disservice to relationships and their asexual partners, if their view is "I really need to orgasm, but someone else that isn't interested has to do it instead of me because reasons." I realized as I've read the 20th complaint about this, this seems pretty fucking selfish.

I think you missed the point doing various wrong assumptions, your post presume that all orgasms are equal, which is not, actually an orgasm can be very bad and another one can be great. That's like saying that since people need to eat they can feed themselves with an I.V. connected to the arm so there is no sense to go to a nice restaurant.

Also sex changes everything, one time when I was studyinf XX century social changes I learnt something interesting, when people started buying televisions it changed living rooms and the way of socializing, people started buying sofas at a higher rate and houses and families changed. It's the same with internet and with sex, when sex is good people get agfected not only for the sex but also because it changes their lives schedule, they tend to go to sleep at the same time, care more about vacations together, about presents, etc..

I would say sex is the most or one of the most important traits of compatibility in a couple. I think that when sexual orientation don't match a couple is doomed or at least unhappy unless they accepts major changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoodwindWhistler

Mostly I'm just relieved that the stress and embarrassment of worrying about whether I will be able to have an orgasm is over.

If you're stressed or embarrassed about anything, you'll likely have a problem with pleasure in general (perhaps even orgasm).

That'd be the first thing to address. Why are you stressed about it? How can you internally alleviate any negative thoughts that you yourself have, or communicate so that any misunderstanding of a partner that causes that stops? (per your statement here:)

Also, after I have an orgasm I am more aroused than before orgasm, yet most partners, especially if male, feel that they've accomplished their mission and should go to sleep now. So really, traditional orgasmcentric sex doesn't work for me at all.

PIV can still feel good for the person with the vagina, even if they can't orgasm that way. It's still sensory. It's still giving attention to nerves and muscles that are usually ignored. Like, when you get a massage, there might be a knotted muscle that needs some intense attention, and when the therapist massages it properly it will feel soooo good. But still, a general relaxing massage also feels good.

On the very rare occasion I have real or artificial PIV action, it can feel nice to experience penetration, but it never feels as good as giving my clitoris proper attention. Even by myself it has its merits. I can't imagine how intensely better it would feel to someone who also had an emotional connection and a whole other body to play with.

That's so funny, because I was discussing with someone once 'What if we took all the semi-and-even-full-on-violent language used for sex and replaced it by talking about it as a particularly strong massage?' That's basically what it is. Tantric practices put great emphasis on teaching women how to fully relax to reap all the benefits.

(and then there's Kegel exercises and such. Women can actually train vaginal muscles, like any other muscle, to flip that 'massage' around.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble

^Good point, I always hated the word, "penetrate". It sounds like you're being stabbed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus

^Good point, I always hated the word, "penetrate". It sounds like you're being stabbed.

To be honest, I find that connotation extremely fitting. From all that I've seen, it surely looks like someone's getting stabbed, too. (I'm obviously not a fan of the penis, nor of any sexual acts that involve it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone

^Good point, I always hated the word, "penetrate". It sounds like you're being stabbed.

Or that basic vaginal fucking is a military victory. Come on, guys, either a) your partner is letting you in, or b) you're a rapist. Don't glamorize it in some middle-ground way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
borkfork

Valprehend. I'm just going to leave this here.

warning: sex and anatomical words and whatnot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Worry! At the Theatre

I used to be a sex worker. My job consisted of getting paid money by men who would watch me masturbate. They would be sitting in a booth, me sitting on a chair on the other side, a glass partition between us. It was very surreal, but I got used to it. I rarely orgasmed, but I did learn how to fake an orgasm quite well for those men who needed their egos fulfilled. However, I don't like masturbation now that I've stopped working there. Since nobody's paying me, there's no real incentive. I suppose it can be compared to extinction in operant conditioning: when there's no positive condition, a behavior is weakened as a result.

I bring this up to illustrate the point that not every non-masturbating person is selfish or doing it out of a religious point-of-view. There is nothing wrong with wanting sex from another person. What is wrong is expecting sex from another person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoodwindWhistler

^Good point, I always hated the word, "penetrate". It sounds like you're being stabbed.

To be honest, I find that connotation extremely fitting. From all that I've seen, it surely looks like someone's getting stabbed, too. (I'm obviously not a fan of the penis, nor of any sexual acts that involve it.)

But . . . that's both an oriface and organ that's supposed to be there. 'Penetrate' implies that something's not meant to be entered, or is forcibly opened. It really doesn't fit. (ha, pun)

^Good point, I always hated the word, "penetrate". It sounds like you're being stabbed.

Or that basic vaginal fucking is a military victory. Come on, guys, either a) your partner is letting you in, or b) you're a rapist. Don't glamorize it in some middle-ground way.

Even with what I said above, people can be sore from sex, so it's not exactly always a walk in the park, either. I don't think we should glamorize it, yeah. If anything, we should be idolizing slow and luxurious lovemaking, but eh, I guess I'll just have to settle for having that in my ace fantasy story because the world apparently isn't ready for that. Heheheh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
If anything, we should be idolizing slow and luxurious lovemaking

But that's not always how sexual people enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus

'Penetrate' implies that something's not meant to be entered, or is forcibly opened.

Well... as much as I intellectually know that biology/anatomy very, very obviously says otherwise (because, well, duh)... emotionally, this does describe my view on the idea of PiV pretty well.

As far as my subjective perception goes, that orifice is indeed not meant to be entered with that thing, and use of violent force is strongly implied if it becomes thusly entered anyway.

As for "letting you in", as Snow put it... that sounds a lot less violent, but this clashes with the stabbing motions, which I see much more in line with "penetration" - an invasive action a male-bodied person performs on a female body. "Letting in", to me, sounds a lot more like the vulva is an active engulfer, and once so engulfed in one single motion, it all comes to rest. Still icky enough if the engulfed thing is a penis (which simply should just not go there... eugh!), but it is a lot less horrifying than if all those thrusting motions get involved. *shudder*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Visenya

Well... as much as I intellectually know that biology/anatomy very, very obviously says otherwise (because, well, duh)... emotionally, this does describe my view on the idea of PiV pretty well.

As far as my subjective perception goes, that orifice is indeed not meant to be entered with that thing, and use of violent force is strongly implied if it becomes thusly entered anyway.

As for "letting you in", as Snow put it... that sounds a lot less violent, but this clashes with the stabbing motions, which I see much more in line with "penetration" - an invasive action a male-bodied person performs on a female body. "Letting in", to me, sounds a lot more like the vulva is an active engulfer, and once so engulfed in one single motion, it all comes to rest. Still icky enough if the engulfed thing is a penis (which simply should just not go there... eugh!), but it is a lot less horrifying than if all those thrusting motions get involved. *shudder*

I thought I was the only person who saw it that way. Good to know I'm not alone! It makes me a bit relieved, for some reason. I've even considered the possibility of being a repressed lesbian or something because of my dick-aversion, but that's not the case. And given that I might be heterosexual after all, it makes my life a bit complicated, but I've never managed to convince myself completely that sex (when it involves a penis) is not gross, unemotional and a bit violating. (no offense to dick-owners). =S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

From what I understand from sexual women, being consensually penetrated is no more a violation than inviting a friend into your house. They enjoy that level of intimacy and actively want it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus

I thought I was the only person who saw it that way. Good to know I'm not alone! It makes me a bit relieved, for some reason. I've even considered the possibility of being a repressed lesbian or something because of my dick-aversion, but that's not the case. And given that I might be heterosexual after all, it makes my life a bit complicated, but I've never managed to convince myself completely that sex (when it involves a penis) is not gross, unemotional and a bit violating. (no offense to dick-owners). =S

Now imagine having that organ in question be part of your own body. *sigh*

I've often wondered whether I'd just have turned out to be a plain and simple Lesbian if I had been born with a second X chromosome instead of the Y I ended up with...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus

From what I understand from sexual women, being consensually penetrated is no more a violation than inviting a friend into your house. They enjoy that level of intimacy and actively want it.

I am aware of that, on an intellectual level. It's just inconceivably alien to me on the emotional one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

I'm sure.... I just wanted to have at least one post on the page that implied some people actually like it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blondbeard

'Penetrate' implies that something's not meant to be entered, or is forcibly opened.

Well... as much as I intellectually know that biology/anatomy very, very obviously says otherwise (because, well, duh)... emotionally, this does describe my view on the idea of PiV pretty well.

As far as my subjective perception goes, that orifice is indeed not meant to be entered with that thing, and use of violent force is strongly implied if it becomes thusly entered anyway.

As for "letting you in", as Snow put it... that sounds a lot less violent, but this clashes with the stabbing motions, which I see much more in line with "penetration" - an invasive action a male-bodied person performs on a female body. "Letting in", to me, sounds a lot more like the vulva is an active engulfer, and once so engulfed in one single motion, it all comes to rest. Still icky enough if the engulfed thing is a penis (which simply should just not go there... eugh!), but it is a lot less horrifying than if all those thrusting motions get involved. *shudder*

I disagree, you don't see it from a different point of viem emotionally but also intellectually, that's because you probably haven"t been in a situation like that. In other words, sometimes is not that the girl let you in but that the girl do everything activelly. For example imagine that the girl grab your penis and mount you bouncing on you in the cowgirl position, you could be motionless and she would be doing everything. Or imagine that she takes it to he mouth. I wouldn 't say that eating a banana is like being raped by the banans, or that an spider eating a fly is that the fly raped the spider. In many positions the girl is the one who use your penis like a comander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus

I don't want to imagine any of that, TYVM. *shudder*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blondbeard

I don't want to imagine any of that, TYVM. *shudder*

Sorry if you dont liked the picture that I did but I think it was necessary to understand it, sometimes people, even some sexuals have an idea very different than what can happen in reality. For example one morning I was sleeping with my girl and I started feeling like I was opening my eyes, what I saw is that basically she was making love to me using my morning bone, she was bouncing on it untill wake me up. I wouldn't say that she let me in, she basically took me in. A girl, an active and passionated one,, can eat you alive for breakfast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nanogretchen4

I'm not sure that was even consensual, but if you had no problem with it after the fact I guess that's okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blondbeard

I'm not sure that was even consensual, but if you had no problem with it after the fact I guess that's okay.

What I was trying to say is that in some sexual positions and situstions the relation is not commanded by the man.

For example the cowgirl position, sometimes the spoon, etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone

I know you're all aware these are your individual subjective perceptions of sex, but...damn, they are very very different from a strong majority of sexual people's interpretation of The Piv. I feel like I should add my own view that I don't see most consensual PIV this way (or PIA for that matter) as an asexual person. I'm not personally thrilled at the thought of phallic inclusion in my yonic realm, but I'm not disturbed by the idea of it in general. It's interesting to see different interpretations of an activity so fundamental to our species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
demisucre

PIV can still feel good for the person with the vagina, even if they can't orgasm that way. It's still sensory. It's still giving attention to nerves and muscles that are usually ignored. Like, when you get a massage, there might be a knotted muscle that needs some intense attention, and when the therapist massages it properly it will feel soooo good. But still, a general relaxing massage also feels good.

On the very rare occasion I have real or artificial PIV action, it can feel nice to experience penetration, but it never feels as good as giving my clitoris proper attention. Even by myself it has its merits. I can't imagine how intensely better it would feel to someone who also had an emotional connection and a whole other body to play with.

This so much. I really am not sure it's about the orgasm for me, as I'm pretty sure I'm demi, the desire to have sex with someone is almost purely an emotional things. It's the desire to be intimate with someone and share intense feelings with them, to let them in, and be soft. I can get myself off if I want an orgasm. So I equate sex with yes, good physical sensation, but really it's mostly just another emotional bonding experience for someone like me who is hyper-romantic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather

PIV can still feel good for the person with the vagina, even if they can't orgasm that way. It's still sensory. It's still giving attention to nerves and muscles that are usually ignored. Like, when you get a massage, there might be a knotted muscle that needs some intense attention, and when the therapist massages it properly it will feel soooo good. But still, a general relaxing massage also feels good.

On the very rare occasion I have real or artificial PIV action, it can feel nice to experience penetration, but it never feels as good as giving my clitoris proper attention. Even by myself it has its merits. I can't imagine how intensely better it would feel to someone who also had an emotional connection and a whole other body to play with.

This so much. I really am not sure it's about the orgasm for me, as I'm pretty sure I'm demi, the desire to have sex with someone is almost purely an emotional things. It's the desire to be intimate with someone and share intense feelings with them, to let them in, and be soft. I can get myself off if I want an orgasm. So I equate sex with yes, good physical sensation, but really it's mostly just another emotional bonding experience for someone like me who is hyper-romantic.

So if there's no sex, that's okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
demisucre

PIV can still feel good for the person with the vagina, even if they can't orgasm that way. It's still sensory. It's still giving attention to nerves and muscles that are usually ignored. Like, when you get a massage, there might be a knotted muscle that needs some intense attention, and when the therapist massages it properly it will feel soooo good. But still, a general relaxing massage also feels good.

On the very rare occasion I have real or artificial PIV action, it can feel nice to experience penetration, but it never feels as good as giving my clitoris proper attention. Even by myself it has its merits. I can't imagine how intensely better it would feel to someone who also had an emotional connection and a whole other body to play with.

This so much. I really am not sure it's about the orgasm for me, as I'm pretty sure I'm demi, the desire to have sex with someone is almost purely an emotional things. It's the desire to be intimate with someone and share intense feelings with them, to let them in, and be soft. I can get myself off if I want an orgasm. So I equate sex with yes, good physical sensation, but really it's mostly just another emotional bonding experience for someone like me who is hyper-romantic.

So if there's no sex, that's okay?

I would say if the person I was wanting to be with did not want to have sex ever, but wanted to cuddle and do other romance-y things, I would most likely be able to learn to be ok with that. Even in sexual relationships, sex is not the end all be all, nor should it be in any relationship.

But for me, I could never be with someone aromantic.

To have a final answer on this topic, you don't need to have sex to orgasm. Many sexual people don't have orgasms when they have sex, for various reasons, and still love to have sex for a lot of other reasons, as people have stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Visenya

I thought I was the only person who saw it that way. Good to know I'm not alone! It makes me a bit relieved, for some reason. I've even considered the possibility of being a repressed lesbian or something because of my dick-aversion, but that's not the case. And given that I might be heterosexual after all, it makes my life a bit complicated, but I've never managed to convince myself completely that sex (when it involves a penis) is not gross, unemotional and a bit violating. (no offense to dick-owners). =S

Now imagine having that organ in question be part of your own body. *sigh*

I've often wondered whether I'd just have turned out to be a plain and simple Lesbian if I had been born with a second X chromosome instead of the Y I ended up with...

Yeah... no offense, but I don't think I want to imagine that. :lol:

I sometimes hate myself for being born a cis woman (I wouldn't feel as bad about it if I were a lesbian or an aromantic ace), but the thought of being a cis man is not very attractive either, partially because of the idea of having a penis. And this aversion I have is part of the reason why I was (am?) so reluctant to identify as heterosexual. I really wish I didn't have to deal with any of that stuff. -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble

A girl, an active and passionated one,, can eat you alive for breakfast.

You make it sound so appealing.

I know you're all aware these are your individual subjective perceptions of sex, but...damn, they are very very different from a strong majority of sexual people's interpretation of The Piv. I feel like I should add my own view that I don't see most consensual PIV this way (or PIA for that matter) as an asexual person. I'm not personally thrilled at the thought of phallic inclusion in my yonic realm, but I'm not disturbed by the idea of it in general. It's interesting to see different interpretations of an activity so fundamental to our species.

They could've fooled me with the language they use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Having been acquainted with several dicks in my life, I must say that although I didn't find their presence pleasurable, they certainly in no way resembled knives in the sense of "stabbing". That's an unfair portrayal of dick activity. -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone

They're more like earthworms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

They're more like earthworms.

Earthworms would be dicks with erectile dysfunction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OutsideObserver

You make it sound so appealing.

The turn of phrase is supposed to denote the eagerness and energy of the individual. For someone to be said to "eat you alive" sexually, it would denote that they are very much enthusiastically into sex. This is appealing to most sexuals, as most sexuals are aroused by their partner's arousal.

They could've fooled me with the language they use.

You do know a lot of that language has more to do with conveying feelings of intense, sometimes aggressive, desire, and not violence or malice towards sexual partners, right? Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...