"Deep emotional bond" or...? (possibly TMI)

[astlel]

Hi! I'm new here, although I've been lurking for a while.

 

I identify as demi, but I'm not sure I totally fit the "requires an emotional bond" model. I do require something, but I'm not sure it's a deep emotional bond per se. More like I need to be totally at ease with my partner, which for me sometimes happens after several months, other times not at all. (If I try to have sex with someone before I'm comfortable with them, it's never pleasurable, and actually usually pretty painful). But, at the point when I can enjoy sex with someone, it doesn't feel like it's because I'm deeply in love with them or whatever-- it's just that I'm totally relaxed around them, not trying to impress them, etc. Does this resonate with anyone else? Or, like, are you supposed to experience a deep romantic connection to someone to be classically demi...?

[Galactic Turtle]

I'm not an expert on anything demi but remember demisexual refers to at what point you experience sexual attraction (if at all) and not when you physically have sex with someone (if at all).  

 

I know very few people who would have sex with someone they weren't comfortable with. Some jumped the gun with their own boyfriends and said the experience was terrible. Now that we're older, they're all much better at taking care of themselves, not giving into pressure to have sex, and knowing when they themselves are ready to have sex with a partner. 

[astlel]

Oh, yeah-- I should have specified that I haven't yet felt sexual attraction to anyone (only aesthetic attraction)

[nerdperson777]

Well the -sexual definition is experiencing the attraction or wanting to have sex with that type of person.  So you could be asexual by the first definition but demisexual by the second definition.

[Star Bit]

Actually, more accurately, Demisexual is desiring sex after an abnormal amount of time rather than a bond, because needing a bond is actually quite normal, just for Demis the time span is longer than the norm (which may be around 5 dates). So it's not nececerily a bond related orientation nor nececerily needs to be a deep bond either. But if you're partially Demisexual and partially immediate desire then I'd say it falls more toward normal because not everyone gets crushes (or the desire for sex) at the same rate every time. But do you desire sex (for its sexual or emotional pleasure) or are you just comfortable having sex after X amount of time?

 

Btw, Demi does not denote sexually or romantically, so it's best to put the full title.

 

1 hour ago, Galactic Turtle said:

I'm not an expert on anything demi but remember demisexual refers to at what point you experience sexual attraction (if at all) and not when you physically have sex with someone (if at all).  

 

30 minutes ago, astlel said:

Oh, yeah-- I should have specified that I haven't yet felt sexual attraction to anyone (only aesthetic attraction)

 

No, Demi isn't about sexual attraction it's about desiring sex period.

It's normal for sexual women to not experience sexual attraction; that's predominantly a male experience and only a minority of women experience (or if they do it's rare).

[Galactic Turtle]

 

24 minutes ago, Star Bit said:

No, Demi isn't about sexual attraction it's about desiring sex period.

Really? Whenever I see people arguing about demisexuality they always harp on the sexual attraction part since not wanting to have sex right away with people you think are attractive is the norm in my experience. In high school especially people went through entire relationships without ever having sex. Just in general on AVEN I see people saying "a demisexual is a person who does not experience sexual attraction unless a strong emotional bond has been formed."

 

24 minutes ago, Star Bit said:

Demis the time span is longer than the norm (which may be between 3-5 dates).

I think everyone I know whose relationships didn't start with a hookup at a college party didn't have both people involved ready to have sex with each other until 3-4 months in....? 

 

The whole grey area confuses me so I'll just leave. Sorry OP. XD *retreats back into a cave*

[astlel]

38 minutes ago, Star Bit said:

Actually, more accurately, Demisexual is desiring sex after an abnormal amount of time rather than a bond, because needing a bond is actually quite normal, just for Demis the time span is longer than the norm (which may be around 5 dates). So it's not nececerily a bond related orientation nor nececerily needs to be a deep bond either. But if you're partially Demisexual and partially immediate desire then I'd say it falls more toward normal because not everyone gets crushes (or the desire for sex) at the same rate every time. But do you desire sex (for its sexual or emotional pleasure) or are you just comfortable having sex after X amount of time?

 

Btw, Demi does not denote sexually or romantically, so it's best to put the full title.

 

 

 

No, Demi isn't about sexual attraction it's about desiring sex period.

It's normal for sexual women to not experience sexual attraction; that's predominantly a male experience and only a minority of women experience (or if they do it's rare).

Oh, okay, that clears up my "does it have to be a deep bond" question! Thanks. To answer your question, I almost never desire or initiate sex, but not never-never.  

[Username_2017]

I think the whole 3-5 dates thing is really misleading unfortunately. Say if I was to go on a date with someone I never knew eg off a dating site I wouldn't expect a bond to be there by the 3rd or 5th date. I am sexual and dating sites just don't work for me.  For me it's more like if I am sexually attracted to someone already then we go on a few dates a bond would have formed as its sort of grown on top of the already there sexual attraction and I could consider sleeping with them.

 

Needing to be at ease is totally normal, unless I am drunk I would feel pretty uncomfortable just having sex if I wasn't comfortable.. Alcohol takes that away and I am tee total now. 

 

As for not experiencing sexual attraction that comes under asexuality which is for you to decide whether you fit that label or not

 

Also enjoying sex and being at ease after a couple of months with a partner sounds kinda 'normal' (whatever that is) to me!

[Snao Cone]

The connection doesn't have to be romantic, per se. You don't need to feel "in love" but have some kind of point reached, like trust. What makes demi different from the rest of the pattern of sexuality is that you don't have any sexual needs being unmet when you're not with someone you're sexually comfortable with. If when you're not in that kind of relationship you get frustrated that you can't have sex because the conditions aren't there, I'd say that's more like regular sexuality than demi, but with a lot of conditions for being interested in anyone in particular. There's actually quite a few people like that.

[Star Bit]

@Galactic Turtle Yah, that's how it's popularly defined, but that doesn't mean it's accurate. As said, it's very common for sexual people to require a bond in order to have sex with someone. It's very common for women to lose sexual desire toward their partner when they feel the bond is dwindling, but that doesn't make them Demi. That would make a TON of sexual people Demi, and the whole point of the Gray spectrum is to address abnormalities. So while it can appear bond related it isn't like that for everyone and the whole point of the term is to address that there's an abnormal amount of time before the person desires sex. Sexual attraction would be irrelevant to that because having sexual attraction does not make one act on it.

 

The popular definition for Lith is that they dont want reciprocation, but most of them who I've talked to WANT it but don't react positively to it actually happening. So these terms need some updates; just like the sexual attraction definition of asexuality. Just because a term has a standing definition and it's been used for some time doesn't mean it's absolute and fully correct; these are all one person's attempts at clarity after all (perhaps with assistance but still one person's wording) and not everyone's the best at that, now are they?

[ChickenPadSeeEew]

On 25/02/2017 at 5:26 PM, Star Bit said:

@Galactic Turtle Yah, that's how it's popularly defined, but that doesn't mean it's accurate. As said, it's very common for sexual people to require a bond in order to have sex with someone. It's very common for women to lose sexual desire toward their partner when they feel the bond is dwindling, but that doesn't make them Demi. That would make a TON of sexual people Demi, and the whole point of the Gray spectrum is to address abnormalities. So while it can appear bond related it isn't like that for everyone and the whole point of the term is to address that there's an abnormal amount of time before the person desires sex. Sexual attraction would be irrelevant to that because having sexual attraction does not make one act on it.

 

So these terms need some updates; just like the sexual attraction definition of asexuality. Just because a term has a standing definition and it's been used for some time doesn't mean it's absolute and fully correct; these are all one person's attempts at clarity after all (perhaps with assistance but still one person's wording) and not everyone's the best at that, now are they?

I really like this definition change, about it being desire for sexual interaction and an extraordinary length of time before that desire for sexual intimacy occurs. I think this promotes limited use of the term, with the atypical time frame (of course, deciding what time frame is a tricky one).

 

I also like the alternate description as feeling/presuming one is asexual for some time (again, what time?) but then learning, on rare/limited occasions, they can actually experience desire for sexual intimacy for some person/s. But again, what is 'rare'? And a 'whoops, surprise!' as a definition of a sexual phenomenon seems kinda non-scientific, lol.

 

But, yes, demisexual, as we describe it right now, suffers from a problem of not having absolutes/clear lines in the sand, and not being exclusive enough to rule out more typical sexual desire experiences. Human behaviour is usually dimensional, though, which makes strict categories difficult to delineate.

 

I think we still need the term (although a name change could help?). Behaviourally, demisexual, especially when defined as either of the above alternative definitions, I think better communicates to potential partners that desire for partnered sex is rare, takes ages, and might not happen at all. (When I read 'no sexual attraction until emotional bond' I cringe. It sounds like 'get close to me, be my friend, and viola! Sexytimes will happen') Individually, the term is useful; it gives someone who experiences sexual desire extremely rarely and slowly personal understanding, acceptance, and a way to communicate that with others. 

 

As a social, behavioural, and cognitive scientist, though, I can't help wonder what is going on for that person to develop that desire after so long? My guess is a combo of biopsychosocial factors, that may increase emotional intimacy over time, which can sometimes lead to/increase the chance of responsive sexual desire over time. (Maybe sluggishness to/complete absence of spontaneous sexual desire means complete reliance on responsive only, which might always take time?) Basically, I want to know, if those same factors can happen faster or slower for some, how do we distinguish it as a phenomenon? Really, just time-frame? I need better variables to help me to understand and explain the phenomenon! Basically, how do we define and explain what could be quite typical factors but just occurring over a different, longer time frame? 

 

I have a fun name change, though! Slowsexual. It took me 2 decades. I think slowsexual explains me well. But so does infrequency of persons for which I feel this desire (I'm nearly 40, and n = 1).

 

 

[ChickenPadSeeEew]

Rare-slow-sexual. Ahaha! 

Slow-rare-sexual. (I feel like I'm ordering a steak)

[ChickenPadSeeEew]

Then grey is faster? Like, low (but some!) desire for sexual intimacy. Perhaps due to low spontaneous sexual desire (but some!) and low responsive sexual desire (but some!)

 

So what separates the two is speed...?

And frequency? 

 

*scratches head*

[Star Bit]

@ChickenPadSeeEew Yah, there is some subjective wording; like what is and isn't infrequent enough/rare. And the answer to that comes in what I said before; what is and isn't normal. But romantically we don't actually have studies on it at all; so we can't actually say. However, while sexually desiring someone once per year may be very low compared to the norm, it still isn't low enough to qualify; it needs to be very rare. On AVEN's wiki they do give the example of 5 crushes in one person's lifetime. And I didn't say we need to get rid of Demisexual/romantic, I said it needs slight redefining.

 

What is the Gray spectrum? Are Grays faster at desiring sex? Well, no. Rarely desiring sex is under the Gray umbrella. For some people rarely sexually desiring someone is related to the time spent with that person (thus Demisexual), but for others it's not related to that and may be unknown on why (but there's no term for this; it's just one of the things under the Gray umbrella that has no name). But the Gray spectrum isn't just rarely sexually desiring others; it's also desiring sex under unusual cercomstances (in terms of point in time). But Gray-sexual and Gray-asexual need slight redefining too. I can elaborate, but this already feels a bit long and you may not even want it.

[ChickenPadSeeEew]

On 11/04/2017 at 2:27 PM, Star Bit said:

@ChickenPadSeeEew Yah, there is some subjective wording; like what is and isn't infrequent enough/rare. And the answer to that comes in what I said before; what is and isn't normal. But romantically we don't actually have studies on it at all; so we can't actually say. However, while sexually desiring someone once per year may be very low compared to the norm, it still isn't low enough to qualify; it needs to be very rare. On AVEN's wiki they do give the example of 5 crushes in one person's lifetime. And I didn't say we need to get rid of Demisexual/romantic, I said it needs slight redefining.

 

What is the Gray spectrum? Are Grays faster at desiring sex? Well, no. Rarely desiring sex is under the Gray umbrella. For some people rarely sexually desiring someone is related to the time spent with that person (thus Demisexual), but for others it's not related to that and may be unknown on why (but there's no term for this; it's just one of the things under the Gray umbrella that has no name). But the Gray spectrum isn't just rarely sexually desiring others; it's also desiring sex under unusual cercomstances (in terms of point in time). But Gray-sexual and Gray-asexual need slight redefining too. I can elaborate, but this already feels a bit long and you may not even want it.

No, I'd love to hear it! Please do elaborate, if you'd be so kind.

[Star Bit]

(at some point; idk when; I wasn't here then) After AVEN had existed for a little while there started to emerge people who were on the Gray spectrum, and thus the term was created. They defined it as being "between sexual and asexual"-- or what they actually mean; "between desiring sex and not". But that wording has the hole of including every sexual person; as sexuals don't desire sex 24/7 (which I don't think people picked up on back then but they are now). Then people started labeling specific things in it such as Demisexual. They originally saw Gray-sexual and Gray-asexual as synonymous, but then there started to be people that more heavily fell to one side, so they then started to say it was "whichever side someone felt they fell more toward". (both definitions still in use)

 

But then that causes problems too. It puts all the titles in the Gray umbrella in unfixed positions; a Demisexual can rarely come to sexually desire others and that puts them on the Gray-ace end, but then another Demisexual can come to desire it more frequently and say they feel closer to the sexual end of the Gray spectrum. And most of the things put at the Gray-A end don't desire sex IRL, so the term isn't explicit in what the user is trying to convey and even refers to polar opposites; which makes the term pointless because then explanations are required. Gray-A is also more popularly used; most likely because it has abreviations like Gray-ace and Grace, while we can't do anything of the sort with Gray-sexual (and Gray-S doesn't have as much of a ring to it). So people can then go by Gray-A no matter how frequently they desire sex; thus really invalidating the (close to) ace part in the wording of the term itself. We can still have simplistic definitions for them; it's just the previous definers ended up going the wrong way about it/ were thinking too simplisticly and not about what that simplism could include.

 

And don't get me started on the problamatic can of worms "asexual spectrum" has created. (If you want that it'll have to be in a PM since we're getting off of the thread's topic.)