Jump to content

Archived

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

Telecaster68

What sexuals are really thinking

Recommended Posts

Tarfeather
1 hour ago, Gleep said:

Love comes in many different flavors and colors. My lady love started out as platonic.. she was straight and monogamous and I was going to keep her in my life no matter what. It evolved slowly over time. Many many hours talking about everything while driving between classes.

Yes, it's true that a lot of people buy a little too much into cultural ideas of love, and that the way they personally can experience love is a lot more dynamic and flexible than what they're allowing themselves. However, after listening to FictoVore  and a few others here on AVEN, I'm convinced that there are indeed such "monoamorous" people, who simply by nature aren't this flexible.

 

1 hour ago, Gleep said:

Polyamory folks do have platonic loves. And we do reach for aces too, and accept them simply as they are.

Neither can Telecaster speak for all sexuals, nor can you speak for all "polyamory folks". I'm pretty sure there are those of us out there who are less than accepting of asexuals.

 

6 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

I hope it didn't come across like I was saying polyamory was bad or anything, but I've had this convo a few times on AVEN and like to clarify that innately monoamorous people do exist, who are literally incapable of desiring emotional and physical intimacy from more than one person at at a time. So even if I'd been married for 30 years I'd have to kill all my feelings for my partner (and leave them) before I could be able to begin to desire intimacy with someone else, if he wasn't meeting my needs. Cheating couldn't accidentally happen as long as I have feelings for my partner because I'm incapable of desiring intimacy if I don't love the person,and can only love one person at a time. I'm just a weirdo, pretty much. lol :P:cake:

In my opinion, that's adorable, not weird. And actually, of the women who have rejected me for this cited reason of "I'm already in a relationship", I wish even one of them had been this sincere. People lying to me, especially when it comes to such a deeply personal and emotional subject, is very hurtful, and somehow it warms my heart seeing someone else actually mean it when they say something like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roland.o
4 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

I'm about to bleach my hair I think. Either that or read a book for my work.

Go for the book. (just a random thought, hope you don't mind :blush:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Neither can Telecaster speak for all sexuals

This is true and I guess I do tend to assume that people in general are nicer than they sometimes turn out to be. I do try to restrict generalisations to stuff that involves partnered sex though, and since there is way, way more tendency for sexuals to see that as part of a relationship (not just marriage-type relationships, but in the sense of the interplay between two people), it's tricky to disentangle it all.

 

In a way, that's the underlying point of this thread - a lot of AVEN's discussions are on the premise that if you dissect and analyse relationships into their component parts, and understand those parts individually, the whole picture will become understandable. In reality, that reductionist approach just doesn't work. You only have to look at the endless, circular, speculative discussions on the nature of attraction/desire to see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali

Everyone is different. And while I am asexual I remain more desirous and drawn to men, than women, in an indefinable way which I suppose makes me straight.....in a sense.  It's just I don't desire sex or physical contact with them. But that makes me uncomfortable. It means that I feel more comfortable having women or gay friends because there's no elephant in the room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
1 hour ago, roland.o said:

Go for the book. (just a random thought, hope you don't mind :blush:)

I did read the book!! I'll get about $300 out of it eventually :D

 

But I'll be bleaching my hair tomorrow, then dying it Atomic Turquoise! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
7 hours ago, Pramana said:

I have a couple sets of questions, and would appreciate any input.

1. The topic of different experiences of orgasms has already come up here as well as in another recent thread. On that account, my experience is that orgasms feel good and all but they don't seem to be that great, and if anything they seem kind of disappointing because they only last a few seconds. I have read that orgasms achieved through partnered sex cause the release of more satisfying brain chemicals, and that in addition partnered sex is about the whole experience rather than just the orgasm. But I still have a hard time conceptualizing why people find partnered sex to be as good as it's often represented to be. I find it easier to see why people who are already in a relationship might take the opportunity to have sex, but some people invest a lot of time and money in the pursuit of sexual encounters, and I have particular difficulty seeing how that would be worthwhile from a cost/benefit standpoint.

2. As someone who is sex-averse, I find that being naked around people is extremely awkward, and I don't like the idea of having to deal with things like genital contact and body fluids and body hair. I wonder if sexual people also find those factors awkward/gross, but they care more about having sex so they don't really think about it? Or is it that unlike me, they don't see an issue in the first place?

So orgasms...

 

I suspect that a lot asexuals just don't get as much pleasure from orgasms as sexuals, from what I've read on AVEN. Partly this could be just physiological, in the same way that some people just don't get as many neurons firing from, say, chocolate, as others. And then if sex in general is associated with awkwardness and stress, that'll affect it too. Generally, for sexuals, if the sex as a whole isn't so good, the orgasm won't be as intense, so that would follow.

 

But orgasms aren't solely about the moments of actual physical climax. The build up and anticipation of knowing there will be a release, can be intense too, and the better it's done (as in teasing, for instance), the bigger the mental and physical release too. That's one of the reasons the 'let's get it over with it' feeling from your partner is such a killer. We know that it's self defeating when it comes to enjoyment, for us. For me, it's very similar to music: a long, beautifully orchestrated sense of building tension makes the harmonic resolution at the end euphoric. Those big major chords (ie orgasm) would be fine without the build up, but with the build up, they're a whole different thing.

 

And orgasms vary for other reasons. For instance, sex, including orgasms, when you're in a very delicate emotional place is very different to drunken one night stands. The whole experience, including orgasm, is different: often deeply emotional with the first, and more like fun or just physically exquisite with the second. They're both great, but they're very different.

 

Then there's the afterwards. Physiologically, orgasm generally floods the brain with oxytocin, dopamine and serotonin. It's a definite hit, in the same way that cannabis or alcohol or any other drug is; the same neurotransmitters are involved. So do other things, but it feels like sex does it far more intensely, and I don't think the combination of all three at once happens much otherwise. That means the 'afterwards' is a very frequently a shared time of woozy, intimate bliss. Not always, but often, and almost always something in that general ballpark. I'm describing this purely as a neurochemical thing, but obviously all brain activity is neurochemical, and that doesn't make any less real or worthwhile.

 

Repulsion...

 

Personally, it's not so much that I find nudity or body hair or sexual fluids repulsive. It depends on aesthetics to an extent, but mostly they're just *there*, and of course they can be socially awkward in the wrong situation. But when they're part of sexual activity, nudity and fluids especially I find actively compelling as they're part of the intimacy and closeness. If my partner was repulsed by either of us being undressed, or repulsed by sexual fluids, I'd find that distancing and quite hard not see as a personal rejection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
3 hours ago, Gleep said:

 

You say you're only able to love one person at a time. So when did you stop loving your mom and choose to love your significant other instead? Which of your parents did you love? Only one. 

Yes I meant romantic love I was just typing in a real hurry. Romantic love and everything that entails for me, like a desire for intimacy that I can't experience without that love being present etc. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
5 hours ago, Law of Circles said:

I remember feeling like sexuality was such an alien thing that I could only understand from an observer's perspective... but now that I've experienced it for myself, it's so much more intuitive to me. 

People who have 'crossed the floor' as it were probably have the most valuable perspective.

 

The 'intuitive' point is interesting, as one of the problems with AVEN's default reductionist approach is that to most sexuals, it makes absolutely no sense. Would you be able to disentangle what sexuals seem to intuit, and what it is that asexuals don't seem to be able to get their heads round?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali
10 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

People who have 'crossed the floor' as it were probably have the most valuable perspective.

 

The 'intuitive' point is interesting, as one of the problems with AVEN's default reductionist approach is that to most sexuals, it makes absolutely no sense. Would you be able to disentangle what sexuals seem to intuit, and what it is that asexuals don't seem to be able to get their heads round?

Perhaps those who have "crossed the line" were really demisexual to begin with, and happen to have found the one after a long time of looking. Doesn't really help to distangle the complexities of human experience. I am one of those who has attempted to get my head around the way I feel, and now I know that for all those years it was just that I am asexual, I feel wonderfully free and happy, and unapologetic with who I am.

 

However people choose to live their lives and deal with issues, the most important thing is that people deserve to be who they are, within or outside relationships.  And I will repeat what I have said in other threads. If there is enough love and intimacy in a relationship that sexual activity, or not becomes a happy compromise, good.  Otherwise the incompatibility is likely to lead to unhappiness, in part at least, because neither side feels the same about it, leading to misunderstanding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali

For those who are in incompatible relationships with an asexual. We are not interested in sex for its own sake, don't understand intuitively why it is an issue. Frankly we can see that it is mega important for the other, want to have sex for loving reasons, and can change behaviour and choose to for loving reasons, and I expect that for some sexuals in a loving relationship that is enough.  But in my opinion it is pointless to expect more than someone is prepared to give, especially over a long term relationship.  It becomes tiring and tiresome for both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
9 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Answer 1: I meant me and you!!! I don't know if Serran is identifying as sexual or more just 'not asexual' haha.

 

Answer 2: okay I actually hadn't seen you commenting as I've been mainly visiting on my phone and its SO hard to scroll through comments on the AVEN mobile setup T_T I actually did mean me and Serran though my point in #1 still stands, I'm not actually even sure if she is identifying as 'sexual'. I still feel like a fraud when I say I'm a sexual for some weird reason haha, I'm just not ace enough (by any stretch of the imagination) to be ace :P Life is so confusing! 

 

I'm about to bleach my hair I think. Either that or read a book for my work. So many decisions to choose from!!!

 

Edit: and yes I agree about this thread dispelling misconceptions though sadly not much of the rest of the site will see it :c

Haha I don't know what I ID as, honestly. I know I'm not asexual. But, I'm not exactly sexual enough to work with most sexuals. I'll probably never have intercourse again, for example. But, then, why should experiencing attraction/desire differently from the norm mean I can't use the label? Who knows. Right now I'm just ... whatever, but I don't like traditional sex. ;)

 

12 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

So even if I'd been married for 30 years I'd have to kill all my feelings for my partner (and leave them) before I could be able to begin to desire intimacy with someone else, if he wasn't meeting my needs. Cheating couldn't accidentally happen as long as I have feelings for my partner because I'm incapable of desiring intimacy if I don't love the person,and can only love one person at a time. I'm just a weirdo, pretty much. lol :P:cake:

Same. I literally can't develop romantic feelings for anyone beyond the person I am with. If things begin to not work and my feelings fade, then I can, but I then have no romantic feelings at all for the other person I used to be with. My heart chooses one person and sticks with that until it's done with it. I could not be poly because I couldn't develop feelings for anyone else. And I don't care to look at / fantasize etc about other people, either. 

 

I can love my friends, I can love my pets, but I can't love someone romantically (or even have any interest in cuddling another person or anything). Cheating has always seemed so strange to me cause... I don't want and can't want anyone else. Even after my first boyfriend broke up with me and my feelings hadn't faded yet, some guy kissed me and I ended up thinking about nothing but my ex and running away (poor guy, but I seriously freaked at someone else's lips being on mine than the person I cared about). 

 

11 hours ago, Pramana said:

I have a couple sets of questions, and would appreciate any input.


2. As someone who is sex-averse, I find that being naked around people is extremely awkward, and I don't like the idea of having to deal with things like genital contact and body fluids and body hair. I wonder if sexual people also find those factors awkward/gross, but they care more about having sex so they don't really think about it? Or is it that unlike me, they don't see an issue in the first place?

 

I am very repulsed by body fluids and, except in the cases of a partner, a bit repulsed by nudity. When I am close to someone emotionally / romantically, nudity stops being repulsive and is just a thing. And, in certain cases, the repulsion to fluids can actually disappear too. It's not so much one thing overrides the other, it's the repulsion actually goes away and isn't there in specific circumstances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

That's the case for many - I'd guess probably most - sexuals, too. 

 

Frequently, if one partner becomes uninterested in sex (regardless of their sexual orientation) it's the start of an emotional distancing by both sides (again, for whatever reason), so by the time I've of them cheats, they are largely disengaged. It's not just overflow horniness finding an arbitrary outlet. 

 

That what's behind the cases where a sexual partner says they can cope with no sex, but then ends up cheating,it's guess. Without the reinforcement from sex, that partner bond corrodes away. Not always, but often. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
3 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

That's the case for many - I'd guess probably most - sexuals, too. 

 

Frequently, if one partner becomes uninterested in sex (regardless of their sexual orientation) it's the start of an emotional distancing by both sides (again, for whatever reason), so by the time I've of them cheats, they are largely disengaged. It's not just overflow horniness finding an arbitrary outlet. 

 

That what's behind the cases where a sexual partner says they can cope with no sex, but then ends up cheating,it's guess. Without the reinforcement from sex, that partner bond corrodes away. Not always, but often. 

But, there are plenty of people who cheat but still love their partners and want to try to make it work.

 

By time I was able to feel anything for anyone else, I would literally be unable to feel anything beyond friendship for the person I was with. Which, would make the relationship unsustainable to begin with. When my one ex started to get interested in another girl (he ended up being poly oriented), it killed my romantic feelings for him. I wasn't mad at him, I just literally felt nothing more for him than I would for a friend. Kissing him was impossible, sleeping in the same bed was impossible, it just felt as gross as trying to be romantic with my mom. Just poof, gone. 

 

Only after that, was I able to develop any sort of feelings for anyone else. Because I had zero left for him. 

 

Whereas, most people I know who have cheated and / or were cheated on, their partners still wanted them, but they wanted someone else too, because the relationship wasn't as fulfilling for them as it used to be. It didn't stop their feelings completely though. A lot of the people I know stayed together romantically, though they had to rebuild trust.  And most people I know still fantasize and think about other people, no matter how much they love their partners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
48 minutes ago, Serran said:

Haha I don't know what I ID as, honestly. I know I'm not asexual. But, I'm not exactly sexual enough to work with most sexuals. I'll probably never have intercourse again, for example. But, then, why should experiencing attraction/desire differently from the norm mean I can't use the label? Who knows. Right now I'm just ... whatever, but I don't like traditional sex. ;)

That's all exactly the same for me too! I just go with 'sexual' because I'm so intensely not asexual haha, but at the same time I'll never be sexual enough to work with your average sexual person. And ditto, I'm actually physically unable to have 'regular' vaginal intercourse or experience pleasure from having my genitals stimulated by a partner, so there's that haha.

 

Spoiler for TMI coming up

 

 

But at the same time I want to nom c*ck so bad, haha! As long as I'm in love with the guy attached to it :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)

It won't let me type anything underneath my spoiler, heh.

 

I do deeply desire non-'traditional' sexual things (along with the thing I mentioned in the spoiler) so I'm definitelyfully accepting of the fact that I'm not ace, but at the same time it's so much easier just not to have a label of any kind! for me personally I know if I was ever to seek another relationship I'd make it 100% clear to any potential partner that I'm not.. er.. 'average', and explain what I mean by that. In the same way an ace has to explain their asexuality.. because I know there are many sexual people who couldn't be happy with someone like me and I could never be happy with any kind of expectation of sex from my partner.. but luckily there are billions of people out there so I can rest assured that there are plenty of people out there who will be a perfect match for me sexually, even if they're slightly harder to find!! ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
Just now, FictoVore. said:

That's all exactly the same for me too! I just go with 'sexual' because I'm so intensely not asexual haha, but at the same time I'll never be sexual enough to work with your average sexual person. And ditto, I'm actually physically unable to have 'regular' vaginal intercourse or experience pleasure from having my genitals stimulated by a partner, so there's that haha.

 

Spoiler for TMI coming up

 

 

  Hide contents

 

But at the same time I want to nom c*ck so bad, haha! As long as I'm in love with the guy attached to it :P [/I]

I can have traditional sex, I just lack interest in it. And if previous partners had lacked interest in it, I maybe would have been able to figure things out earlier? I don't know. It's weird cause I feel a lot like a virgin again, fumbling around trying to figure out how things work when you take away traditional sexual expectations. 

 

And, out of respect for my partner, I won't go into details of what I do have interest in like I normally would. :P But, yeah, certainly goes beyond asexual interests. And you know you don't have to censor if you're saying it in spoilers. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
39 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

That's the case for many - I'd guess probably most - sexuals, too. 

 

Frequently, if one partner becomes uninterested in sex (regardless of their sexual orientation) it's the start of an emotional distancing by both sides (again, for whatever reason), so by the time I've of them cheats, they are largely disengaged. It's not just overflow horniness finding an arbitrary outlet. 

 

That what's behind the cases where a sexual partner says they can cope with no sex, but then ends up cheating,it's guess. Without the reinforcement from sex, that partner bond corrodes away. Not always, but often. 

Makes me wonder if there was ever a 'bond' in the first place.  After all, are they 'bonding' with their affair partner? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
11 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Makes me wonder if there was ever a 'bond' in the first place.  After all, are they 'bonding' with their affair partner? 

The sexual intimacy is part of that bond and if the intimacy fades, the bond fades with it, for some sexuals. I'd personally have to forcibly break that bond, the lack of sexual intimacy couldn't break it for me. I still love, adore, worship, my partner..despite being apart etc. I can't lose that bond as a result of no intimacy. Only distance and time can kill it for me, but I don't even want it killed :S

 

Regardless, it works differently for different people. I actually had a couple of vodkas tonight while watching a  movie, so Serran did a better job of responding to Tele's comment than I did. It's very different from sexual to sexual, but just because a bond fades for whatever reason doesn't mean there was never one to start with or that a new bond can't be forged with someone else eventually :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather
41 minutes ago, Serran said:

But, there are plenty of people who cheat but still love their partners and want to try to make it work.

 

By time I was able to feel anything for anyone else, I would literally be unable to feel anything beyond friendship for the person I was with. Which, would make the relationship unsustainable to begin with. When my one ex started to get interested in another girl (he ended up being poly oriented), it killed my romantic feelings for him. I wasn't mad at him, I just literally felt nothing more for him than I would for a friend. Kissing him was impossible, sleeping in the same bed was impossible, it just felt as gross as trying to be romantic with my mom. Just poof, gone. 

 

Only after that, was I able to develop any sort of feelings for anyone else. Because I had zero left for him. 

 

Whereas, most people I know who have cheated and / or were cheated on, their partners still wanted them, but they wanted someone else too, because the relationship wasn't as fulfilling for them as it used to be. It didn't stop their feelings completely though. A lot of the people I know stayed together romantically, though they had to rebuild trust.  And most people I know still fantasize and think about other people, no matter how much they love their partners.

That's true. I don't think I've met anyone like you outside of AVEN. For my friends in commited relationships, being faithful to their partner is a choice. Which is why these people take so badly to the idea of poly, even considering being disloyal, to them would feel disloyal. Meanwhile, it's much easier to discuss this subject with an innately monoamorous person, because to them the idea isn't offensive, it's just that they wouldn't personally be interested in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roland.o
1 hour ago, Serran said:

And, in certain cases, the repulsion to fluids can actually disappear too. It's not so much one thing overrides the other, it's the repulsion actually goes away and isn't there in specific circumstances.

Would that be gray-repulsion?

 

*scnr*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
Just now, roland.o said:

Would that be gray-repulsion?

 

*scnr*

Maybe :lol:

 

14 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

That's true. I don't think I've met anyone like you outside of AVEN. For my friends in commited relationships, being faithful to their partner is a choice. Which is why these people take so badly to the idea of poly, even considering being disloyal, to them would feel disloyal. Meanwhile, it's much easier to discuss this subject with an innately monoamorous person, because to them the idea isn't offensive, it's just that they wouldn't personally be interested in it.

I don't really know why some people are upset about poly. I get not wanting to with a person who is, but offended by someone else being poly? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
1 hour ago, vega57 said:

Makes me wonder if there was ever a 'bond' in the first place.  After all, are they 'bonding' with their affair partner? 

Yes to both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
45 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

That's true. I don't think I've met anyone like you outside of AVEN. For my friends in commited relationships, being faithful to their partner is a choice. Which is why these people take so badly to the idea of poly, even considering being disloyal, to them would feel disloyal. Meanwhile, it's much easier to discuss this subject with an innately monoamorous person, because to them the idea isn't offensive, it's just that they wouldn't personally be interested in it.

I'm pretty much innately monamorous. I was in a LDR at university (pre internet, so all we had was phone calls and letters) and being loyal just wasn't an issue, despite the opportunities of being a student. I just wasn't interested in anyone else; it was no kind of sacrifice. I've noticed it in other relationships too, as though there's a switch in my head that's not really under my control, to do with being pair bonded. Part of that is sex, but only because it's a shared emotional experience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pramana
6 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Then there's the afterwards. Physiologically, orgasm generally floods the brain with oxytocin, dopamine and serotonin. It's a definite hit, in the same way that cannabis or alcohol or any other drug is; the same neurotransmitters are involved. So do other things, but it feels like sex does it far more intensely, and I don't think the combination of all three at once happens much otherwise. That means the 'afterwards' is a very frequently a shared time of woozy, intimate bliss. Not always, but often, and almost always something in that general ballpark. I'm describing this purely as a neurochemical thing, but obviously all brain activity is neurochemical, and that doesn't make any less real or worthwhile.

It's funny you mentioned that a combination of oxytocin, serotonin, and dopamine doesn't happen much outside partnered sex, since it would for people who have a lot of MDA, MDMA, and cocaine around. And then there're psychedelics, which are super intense.

I've discussed this issue with some of my friends before, and the perception seems to be that even if the drugs are better, they still can't replace partnered sexual activity. That has led me to think there must be something else besides the aforementioned brain chemicals, or about the way in which partnered sex produces those brain chemicals, which is different from employing organic chemistry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kokabel

I'm backtracking a little but there was soo much said in this thread.

 

So - Orgasms.

 

On 8/24/2017 at 3:09 PM, vega57 said:

Take orgasms out of the equation. 

 

Would MOST sexuals still want to have sex? 

I can't speak for all sexuals, but for me - Yes. YES. A thousand times yes. The orgasm is the dessert to a five course meal. It's the finale of a Broadway show. While it feels GREAT and it's perfect there's this sadness the tinges it for me. It's OVER (*sob*). Seriously though, while some people can apparently multi-orgasm and go forever, I cannot. So once orgasm is met it's time to sleep or get back to life after a pause.

 

Half the game of sex for me is how to AVOID orgasm and draw out the event as long as frickin' possible. So yes. If I could have sex without orgasm I'd probably just pass out from lack of food/sleep/water.

 

16 hours ago, Pramana said:

my experience is that orgasms feel good and all but they don't seem to be that great, and if anything they seem kind of disappointing because they only last a few seconds. I have read that orgasms achieved through partnered sex cause the release of more satisfying brain chemicals, and that in addition partnered sex is about the whole experience rather than just the orgasm. But I still have a hard time conceptualizing why people find partnered sex to be as good as it's often represented to be. I find it easier to see why people who are already in a relationship might take the opportunity to have sex, but some people invest a lot of time and money in the pursuit of sexual encounters, and I have particular difficulty seeing how that would be worthwhile from a cost/benefit standpoint.

In my experience it is true that you can have different kinds of orgasms - but I couldn't get you a mathematical formula for it. Sometimes there's like a sweet spot in sex that if you DON'T orgasm then, your body sort of over-loads and any orgasm after that point isn't as great. Sometimes a few-second quicky is more intense/bonding than a few-hour ordeal.

 

I honestly think there's a sort of leftover "Myth" of how awesome the orgasm is, and average/stereotypical sexuals (those swayed by Amatonormativity maybe) chase this as the stamp of success. There are countless sitcom episodes about women "faking" that get close to talking about this and fail pretty bad. Again I'm not talking for all sexuals, but I would venture a guess that MANY of us don't really care about the orgasm or not. It's FUN. But it's like, if at the end of the five-course meal you dropped your dessert on the ground and couldn't get another? It would be sad and maybe a little disappointing depending on how good it looked, but really the rest of the night was awesome so you come out with a net win for sure, 10/10 would do again.

 

8 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

For me, it's very similar to music: a long, beautifully orchestrated sense of building tension makes the harmonic resolution at the end euphoric. Those big major chords (ie orgasm) would be fine without the build up, but with the build up, they're a whole different thing.

Beautiful. But sometimes you just want a dubstep drop. ;)

 

Ok done with orgasms.

 

16 hours ago, Pramana said:

2. As someone who is sex-averse, I find that being naked around people is extremely awkward, and I don't like the idea of having to deal with things like genital contact and body fluids and body hair. I wonder if sexual people also find those factors awkward/gross, but they care more about having sex so they don't really think about it? Or is it that unlike me, they don't see an issue in the first place?

I hear some people like it (like, really really like it). I remember being a little girl saying something about how GROSS chest-hair is to me, and some older lady told me "you think that now, but one day you'll see". And I still have mini nightmares about wtf she meant. I STILL don't find chest hair attractive.

 

I'll say that sexuals are humans and still have mental and emotional disabilities, suffer from low self-esteem. When I feel particularly fat or gross, I lose my sex drive. Doesn't make me asexual, just means I feel bad about myself and need to get that in check. Other people have, say, OCD and are sexual. And sex becomes amazingly troublesome. 

 

So, yeah we can find it gross. Some like it, some hate it, some medicate for it, some ignore it, some don't notice. I'd say over-generalizing, sexuals most likely think the reward is worth it.

 

On 8/24/2017 at 3:20 PM, asexjoe said:

It isn't fair to whom, exactly?

 

There doesn't seem to be anyone here that claims to experience without sex that which you argue so convincingly have experienced only FROM sex.

 

As for your last question, no I haven't experienced it and it never occurred to me that I ever would.

 

It just wasn't in my vocabulary. You can't expect me to feel with wooden legs what you feel with natural ones.

This is older from the thread but a few things.

The experience originally described isn't how I would describe sex - it was just one person's experience. And I've had multiple partners over the years, and my sex with them has never felt the same one person to the next. It's as unique as the people in the relationship (and, every relationship sexual or not is the same variation to me).

 

So because the experience of sex is inconsistent, it's hard to say if another person has felt that or not. From what I've seen, asexuals can experience similar emotions from sunrises shared, good music, deep talks, etc.

 

Let's say there's a cake on a table. We like cake here. You can experience the cake in a thousand ways.

 

In my analogy I'll say sexuals REALLY want to eat the cake. Some people will savor the icing, licking it for like three hours longer than necessary just to draw out even millimeter of delicious. Some will just dive right in, sheetcaking style. Some will take one piece at a time very reasonably. Some will scrape off the icing and just eat the cake. Some will eat only the icing and leave the cake. You get the idea.

 

But some people don't want cake (maybe cause carbs). But they like the smell of cake. They want to close their eyes and just FEEL the scent.

Some people don't want to eat or smell cake. But think they're really really pretty. So they want to look at them and share pictures.

Some people dgaf about cake and are bored right now.

 

Someone who loves to eat the cake will of course think it's "sad" that someone else doesn't want to eat the cake too. This is just basic human empathy (and where some of the anti-sexual rhetoric in the world probably comes from. We mean well but come off as if asexuals are "missing out" because of our ignorance).

 

But we need to allow the possibility that those who like SMELLING the cake (etc) may be feeling the same exact way as (or maybe more intensely than) those who eat it (this is where she mentions "not fair" - we aren't going to make assumptions on what they do or don't feel.)

 

Obviously if you don't eat the cake you won't experience eating the cake. But you can experience THE CAKE in a different way, that might feel emotionally/internally the same way. Or, the emotion we get from eating cake? They get from eating ramen. I don't know. And that's the point.

 

Personally, my greatest bond and close connection to another thing - one that fills my whole soul and makes me... complete, connected, loved, whole, understood .... is from laying in a kayak down a river bathed in speckled light as cicadas chirp.

 

So, you can find these emotions in other places, other ways. Sexuals tend to just have a certain slant to their perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234

I recognize a lot of what you write @Law of Circles I sorta recently landed on the demisexual label from having Id'd as asexual for a long while. I now count myself as sexual though there are aspects that I can't relate with to some other sexuals.

I find myself relating to both sides as I have been in the position of not getting what is so good about sex and now seeing how lovely it is when with a deep bond to a loving partner.

I can relate to asexuals that can't live up to sexual expectations as I have felt that guilt even if in a smaller scale before I got more used to or developed my sexual feelings for my bf. I don't have as big of a libido either like for example having sex every day as my partner could. The pain of not living up to expectations to something that is important to the other is rough even if it was something I mainly put on myself.

I also can relate to sexuals with an asexual partner because I know how much I value closeness and emotional intimacy through sex and otherwise. When my bf is distant (dealing with his own stuff) and for example refusing a hug or talking coldly I can apply that feeling of rejection and like having done something wrong to how someone could feel with a lack of reciprocation of sexual desire. 

To me I would rather never have sex than to have a partner engage in it with me if they did not enjoy it were they asexual or if not able to for other reasons like libido dying, sickness etc. If it were no hugs, kisses or emotional closeness in other ways I would find it hard to remain romantic feelings though I imagine.

One could go into lengths about the difference between asexual and sexual but I see it as there having to be a switch. It simply is no switch for an asexual or nothing that turns it on (lols) for some reason or another. That is how it was for me before (was even sex repulsed) and I mean it mainly as a mental thing I suppose though since for me personally arousal and libido is very much tied to my mentality and without the right components it dies down or won't work to spark well if at all. That is not the norm I'd say as physical arousal and libido can happen anyway. 

Any sexual can relate somehow because imagine sex with a family member or something....def no switch there. The confusion I think for sexuals is how can there be romantic love and care without sexual desire? It usually coexists so closely and from the get go for most people. With this I can relate to asexuals more because the falling in love, deep romantic feelings happened to me first long before the sexual desire popped up. With the sexual feelings arriving sure it adds another dimension to it but my love was in no way lesser or not as romantic before that happened. It was hard to not be taken seriously with that as if it must simply be platonic as there is a huge difference to me. 

 

I think pretty much the same as you @FictoVore. about monogamy. I wouldn't be able to get feelings for anyone else and wanting to be romantically intimate with someone other than my partner. It'd have to be if we had split and the feelings had ended somehow for there to even present itself with an opportunity of experiencing something similar again. I simply am unable to plus it goes against my morals. There is no other way than monogamy to me but only when it comes to romantic love. Platonic love between family, friends and pets I suppose one could say are rather poly to me lol....I embrace all the cats! :)

 

With orgasm I don't think that has happened for me with piv but it doesn't matter it's just as amazing without it, it is the connection and closeness umphing up all else. Without that it'd be quite gross with sex to me. The physical feelings would be meh even urgh otherwise...that is just me though. If I make a comparison it's like the sensations of a hug isn't good to me on its own if I hug someone i don't like. There are mental components that are needed more or less for people to enjoy or dislike a physical thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spookchi Boonut
4 hours ago, Kokabel said:

I'm backtracking a little but there was soo much said in this thread.

 

So - Orgasms.

 

I can't speak for all sexuals, but for me - Yes. YES. A thousand times yes. The orgasm is the dessert to a five course meal. It's the finale of a Broadway show. While it feels GREAT and it's perfect there's this sadness the tinges it for me. It's OVER (*sob*). Seriously though, while some people can apparently multi-orgasm and go forever, I cannot. So once orgasm is met it's time to sleep or get back to life after a pause.

 

Half the game of sex for me is how to AVOID orgasm and draw out the event as long as frickin' possible. So yes. If I could have sex without orgasm I'd probably just pass out from lack of food/sleep/water.

 

In my experience it is true that you can have different kinds of orgasms - but I couldn't get you a mathematical formula for it. Sometimes there's like a sweet spot in sex that if you DON'T orgasm then, your body sort of over-loads and any orgasm after that point isn't as great. Sometimes a few-second quicky is more intense/bonding than a few-hour ordeal.

 

I honestly think there's a sort of leftover "Myth" of how awesome the orgasm is, and average/stereotypical sexuals (those swayed by Amatonormativity maybe) chase this as the stamp of success. There are countless sitcom episodes about women "faking" that get close to talking about this and fail pretty bad. Again I'm not talking for all sexuals, but I would venture a guess that MANY of us don't really care about the orgasm or not. It's FUN. But it's like, if at the end of the five-course meal you dropped your dessert on the ground and couldn't get another? It would be sad and maybe a little disappointing depending on how good it looked, but really the rest of the night was awesome so you come out with a net win for sure, 10/10 would do again.

 

Beautiful. But sometimes you just want a dubstep drop. ;)

 

Ok done with orgasms.

Personal perspective: I've stated here that I can't orgasm but still enjoy sex. It's still enjoyable for me. I don't, however, actually know what an orgasm is like. So I can't compare sex - orgasm with sex + orgasm. I'm sure it's better if there's an orgasm but I dunno. It's still fun and pleasurable so I'm fine without it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Law of Circles
15 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

Yes, it's true that a lot of people buy a little too much into cultural ideas of love, and that the way they personally can experience love is a lot more dynamic and flexible than what they're allowing themselves. However, after listening to FictoVore  and a few others here on AVEN, I'm convinced that there are indeed such "monoamorous" people, who simply by nature aren't this flexible.

Strongly poly person here and I agree. There are a lot of people out there who are simply monogamous by default, and they might not be aware of polyamory or have given it much thought. For those people, challenging them about cultural expectations of love makes sense. But in my experience, the naturally monoamorous folks on AVEN - like @FictoVore. and @Serran - usually are aware of polyamory and have given it some thought before realizing that they're monoamorous. They're aware of poly and they don't necessarily have a problem with people being poly; they just know it's not for them. I respect that. I only wish more people thought through their relationship choices that way and extended the same kind of acceptance towards those who are motivated to make different choices.

 

13 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

People who have 'crossed the floor' as it were probably have the most valuable perspective.

 

The 'intuitive' point is interesting, as one of the problems with AVEN's default reductionist approach is that to most sexuals, it makes absolutely no sense. Would you be able to disentangle what sexuals seem to intuit, and what it is that asexuals don't seem to be able to get their heads round?

Well, one of the reasons I used the word "intuitive" it's difficult to describe in words exactly... it's more of a feeling that I get.

 

I think you're right that the reductionist approach can confuse more than it clarifies sometimes. From an asexual perspective, sex probably seems like such an arbitrary thing to want in an intimate relationship. Asexuals often talk about sex in kind of a clinical, mechanical way (e.g. "mashing genitals together") which often gives me an involuntary jolt. It sounds wrong. If that's all sex was to me, I wouldn't want anything to do with it either. I think speaking of sex as if it's all about orgasms misses the point too, at least for me. I'd rather have lots of foreplay and no orgasms than the other way around. I like the buildup, the feeling of intrigue, the exploration... as for orgasms, though, I can do well enough with those on my own, so I don't care all that much whether they happen during sex or not.

 

Edit: I should also add that sex is more of an optional add on to an intimate relationship to me. It's not necessary for me to feel intimate and connected with someone, so I'm quite happy to have nonsexual intimate relationships too. This makes me a bit different from some of the other sexuals on AVEN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
6 minutes ago, Law of Circles said:

Strongly poly person here and I agree. There are a lot of people out there who are simply monogamous by default, and they might not be aware of polyamory or have given it much thought. For those people, challenging them about cultural expectations of love makes sense. But in my experience, the naturally monoamorous folks on AVEN - like @FictoVore. and @Serran - usually are aware of polyamory and have given it some thought before realizing that they're monoamorous. They're aware of poly and they don't necessarily have a problem with people being poly; they just know it's not for them. I respect that. I only wish more people thought through their relationship choices that way and extended the same kind of acceptance towards those who are motivated to make different choices.

I actually dated someone who was poly oriented and didn't tell me til a year into the relationship that his ideal was a four person relationship, where he'd be free to have sex with anyone within the four as he wanted. The reason I am as aware of poly as I am is because I tried to be OK with that, I really did. But, it wasn't my thing. A lot of people have never met anyone poly, so it's maybe a little bit of a shock for them when they do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Law of Circles
1 minute ago, Serran said:

I actually dated someone who was poly oriented and didn't tell me til a year into the relationship that his ideal was a four person relationship, where he'd be free to have sex with anyone within the four as he wanted. The reason I am as aware of poly as I am is because I tried to be OK with that, I really did. But, it wasn't my thing. A lot of people have never met anyone poly, so it's maybe a little bit of a shock for them when they do?

Yeah, a lot of people don't seem to know much about polyamory, if they've even heard the word at all. A lot of people immediately assume that it's cheating, which probably contributes to the shock as well. I'm a big believer that awareness and visibility of alternative relationship styles (like poly) is really important in helping people make informed choices about what's right for them. It's not that I think polyamory is better or that everyone is poly; I just feel that it would be ideal if everyone knew enough about it to decide for themselves, whether they ultimately decide on monogamy or polyamory or something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...