Jump to content

Archived

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

alibali

This may explain why asexuals have sex

Recommended Posts

Telecaster68

Physical fitness aside, which can obviously be achieved in other ways, having sex is as beneficial for sexuals as not having sex is for sexuals, I'd conclude. Journalism is always written for a specific audience, and focuses on their interests. It can't address everyone, or there'd have to be incessant caveats to take account of every tiny exception. If asexuals are going to be one of those then every other conceivable 1% grouping would have to have all their qualifiers included too: the richest, poorest, stupidest, most intelligent, people who had been in special forces... Make up your own). It would be unreadable and incomprehensible. 

 

The journalists in the articles cited are simply writing  for the overwhelming majority of their readership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

Journalism is always written for a specific audience, and focuses on their interests. It can't address everyone, or there'd have to be incessant caveats to take account of every tiny exception.

This is something that I think a lot of people around here could do with learning to understand, even among the non-journalist crowd >_>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone
7 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Again, there's a lot of research on this.

Care to cite your sources? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble
13 hours ago, Law of Circles said:

(Spoiler contains off-topic musings about socks and secks...)

  Hide contents

 

I guess I'm going to have to dissent from the majority here and say that I do enjoy the look of some socks and stockings, especially long ones. I don't even have a foot fetish - I just find knee-high and thigh-high socks aesthetically appealing on some builds. I think a good pair of socks can accentuate the shape and length of a person's legs, so... I would probably not require them to be removed during sex. :P

 

 

Yeah

 

12 hours ago, Philip027 said:

I don't really see what the big deal with socks are; unless some sort of foot fetish or something is at play, I wouldn't really think most people would be paying any significant attention to the feet during typical sexual encounters.  (The attention is usually drawn to areas higher up...)

 

I wouldn't call it a fetish (that carries a sexual connotation to me), but I like giving massages :D

 

I don't usually like receiving them though.  They're usually too rough, and I'm admittedly fragile.

That's nice. Head messages are probably better though. I especially like getting my hair washed at a salon. 

6 hours ago, Homer said:

In other news, feet are yucky :ph34r:

Then you'll be thankful for socks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
9 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Would socks like that still look cool to you if they had feet on the bottom, making them real socks instead of leg warmers? haha. I personally think socks that end above the thigh look really nice, regardless of whether the person is clothed or nekked. It's definitely hard to look cool in below the knee socks though :P

Above the thigh? Blimey... Above the knee works for me... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

Above the thigh? Blimey... Above the knee works for me... 

Haha oops that's a typo on my part as a result of rushing when I post, but above the thigh would be a full set of waist high tights that generally aren't too sexy :P We seem to be in agreement though that above the knee automatically makes a sock cooler than one that ends below the knee :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Probably best not to go into the exact nature of the coolness here or asexuals will be reaching for smelling salts en masse.

Share this post


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

Mostly the journalism.  Sex is glorified in our culture, and the pitfalls are often minimized. 

 

UTI's

STI's

STD's, some of them incurable and literally deadly

PItfalls of birth control (such as some pretty serious medical emergencies using The Pill, for example)

Unwanted pregnancy

Not to mention some of the emotional issues that can be involved. 

 

 

Those articles are aimed at a specific audience in the same way an article about 'benefits of owning a Porsche' or 'why Porsche is an amazing car' are aimed at a specific audience. The Porsche articles are aimed at a specific type of audience (rich people, and those who wish they were rich enough to own one) in the same way the sex articles are appealing to a specific portion of the population  (albeit a very large portion).

 

Most people are aware of some of the negative side-effects of sex (especially sex you're not into) and I did a quick Google before of terms like 'side effects of too much sex' 'when sex can be bad for your health' and found plenty of mainstream articles discussing many different aspects of that other side of sex, aimed at the general population.

 

But including those negative aspects of sex in an article about the benefits of it would be like including pics of car crash victims like that poor girl who crashed her father's Porsche because she couldn't handle the speed in the Porsche article and saying 'but hey this is what could happen if you can't handle your new Porsche so keep that in mind when you contemplate all the stuff we've just told you about why Porsches are amazing cars'. Everyone knows cars cost a lot to run, are expensive to fix, and can cause horrific injuries if driven too fast or crashed some other way, and that they could hit a kid or animal or whatever.. but they're not going to include all that in an article about 'why Porsche is the best car I ever owned and you should consider buying one too'.

 

Same applies for anything. Benefits of exercising (if you're jogging you could get mugged, raped, even murdered, could hurt yourself badly, could get addicted to exercise) benefits of drinking more water (drinking too much water has killed people and there can be parasites and bacteria in water and a few people are actually allergic to it - fail genes) benefits of getting more sleep (too much sleep is a sign of depression or another illness) etc etc.

 

There are separate articles that cover those negative aspects of whatever the topic is and those are aimed at different people than the 'benefits' articles. Like someone sleeping too much all the time so it's interfering with their life will be more interested in 'what too much sleep could be doing to your health' than 'why everyone should be getting a good night's sleep'. And someone who hates sleeping would be more interested in 'how to survive on as little sleep as possible'.

 

Different strokes different folks. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone

The benefits of exercising or sleep is a much better comparison for sex-topic articles than Porsches. Because no article is going to say "If you don't have a Porsche, you may have cancer" or some parallel to that and be taken seriously.

 

Reasons sex is featured in media so much:

  • Most people have and/or want it.
  • It sparks interest easily.
  • It sells.

Completely valid things to say without being sexphobic, an asexual elitist, or of inferior intelligence to sexual people:

  • "I wish I didn't see it in everything."
  • "It doesn't reflect my experiences."
  • "It oversimplifies information, which ignores the range of variation that makes the general findings not universally applicable."

 

It's very easy to live alongside things that are irrelevant to my life and interests, absolutely. But I wonder why there is such a quick and fierce defense of any criticism of widely sexual culture from some of the sexual members here. It's like if I said "There are too many bare titties in [TV show]" some of the sexual people would rush to demand I cite scientific sources proving it. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
On 9/28/2017 at 10:25 AM, GLRDT said:

Oh I get it now. I think we were talking about two different things at first. Homer was talking about society/media influencing or not your sexual orientation and I was attempting rather poorly to talk about society/media influencing our obsession with sex in movies, commercials, books, everything in our world. So I'm wondering if media focuses on sex because many of us our sexual beings or because while many of us still may be sexual beings media has still brainwashed us to think sex has to be involved in everything all the time? I'm still not sure if I'm being clear but one thing I want to make clear is I don't think sexual orientation is a choice. You are born with that. 

I don't think Homer was talking specifically about orientations; rather, they were talking about the fact that for people who want and enjoy sex, that is innate, not engendered by media.   The fact that there IS various media (which has only existed for about 80 years) may make it seem as though everything is about sex.  That's because with the proponderance of sexual people, advertisers have found that sex sells.  But it doesn't with asexuals, who can experience the sex advertising as being really oppressive, much more than sexuals do.   So how you innately feel about sex -- want it or don't want it in your life  -- is separate from sexual advertising.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
7 minutes ago, Snao Çoñé said:

The benefits of exercising or sleep is a much better comparison for sex-topic articles than Porsches. Because no article is going to say "If you don't have a Porsche, you may have cancer" or some parallel to that and be taken seriously.

Well the Porsche was just the name of a specific car I could think of off the top of my head, but it's very true that most people think an adult person cannot 'function' properly without a car.. moreso than sleep and exercise lol. I think you're a walker like me Snao? But I've often found myself responding to people who say ''the nearest shops are 20 minutes walk away that's just not practical without a car'' ..lol, that's about as long as the walk to school with my kids, but i manage it four times a day every weekday. The nearest shop is even further, and to actually get into town it's a 40 minute bus ride at $13 each way ..But I still manage as someone who relies solely on my feet (and public transport where necessary) even though I don't have the convenience of living in a city (where everything is much more accessible and busses are cheaper). Many articles talking about cars just automatically assume that no one can get by without one haha.. And those articles obviously are not aimed at a minority such as myself (or at you, if I'm correct that you don't drive?). Walkers are also massively underrepresented in the media, everyone has a car unless they're homeless or a school kid, or set over a century ago, pretty much. Where's my representation???!!!

 

Many people here (whether sexual or ace) do ask for sources if something doesn't seem right or accurate. It's just that sex is what's most commonly being discussed and that's generally quite relevant to sexual members :P

 

Also it's a fact that for some people, loss of interest sex can actually be a sign of a serious underlying medical condition. Obviously not owning a Porsche just means you're poor or don't want to own a Porsche. But articles mentioning that not wanting sex (especially suddenly) could be pointing to a serious underlying medical condition aren't necessarily exaggerating or incorrect or anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

That's what I would've said if I'd been arsed to type it on my tablet.

Share this post


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

 The nearest shop is even further, and to actually get into town it's a 40 minute bus ride at $13 each way

I know this is off topic, and I'm not trying to hijack, BUT...

 

Are you friggin' SERIOUS???????  Dang!  Where I live it costs $2 for  2 hour bus pass.  *shakes head* 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone
1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

Well the Porsche was just the name of a specific car I could think of off the top of my head, but it's very true that most people think an adult person cannot 'function' properly without a car.. moreso than sleep and exercise lol. I think you're a walker like me Snao? But I've often found myself responding to people who say ''the nearest shops are 20 minutes walk away that's just not practical without a car'' ..lol, that's about as long as the walk to school with my kids, but i manage it four times a day every weekday. The nearest shop is even further, and to actually get into town it's a 40 minute bus ride at $13 each way ..But I still manage as someone who relies solely on my feet (and public transport where necessary) even though I don't have the convenience of living in a city (where everything is much more accessible and busses are cheaper). Many articles talking about cars just automatically assume that no one can get by without one haha.. And those articles obviously are not aimed at a minority such as myself (or at you, if I'm correct that you don't drive?). Walkers are also massively underrepresented in the media, everyone has a car unless they're homeless or a school kid, or set over a century ago, pretty much. Where's my representation???!!!

I can get by this 1000%. :D

 

 

2 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Many people here (whether sexual or ace) do ask for sources if something doesn't seem right or accurate. It's just that sex is what's most commonly being discussed and that's generally quite relevant to sexual members :P

A lot of things discussed here are personal observations, though. All over the internet (worse in other places than here, certainly) it's become a cheap go-to argumentation tactic to say "cite your sources" whenever someone doesn't want to acknowledge that the other person has a right to their own perspective. It definitely happens in all directions here, too. I just have to laugh sometimes to continue participating in the online world without pulling my hair out. :P

 

 

2 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Also it's a fact that for some people, loss of interest sex can actually be a sign of a serious underlying medical condition. Obviously not owning a Porsche just means you're poor or don't want to own a Porsche. But articles mentioning that not wanting sex (especially suddenly) could be pointing to a serious underlying medical condition aren't necessarily exaggerating or incorrect or anything. 

Definitely true, and the same can be said for things like weight loss. We see weight loss as almost always good, but in some cases it's a sign of something malfunctioning in the body and it shouldn't be celebrated just because the waist measurement has gone down. Conversely, if a lack of sex is always seen as bad, that is detrimental to the awareness and acceptance of asexuality, as in those cases a lack of sex is neutral if not good. Both you and I know how the persistent message that everyone wants sex can lead a person to having sex they don't want. The way to prevent that is of course not removing sexual content from media (there are all sorts of reasons that's a bad idea) but giving clearer and a more diverse range of messages. Even many sexual people think the headlines on the cover of Cosmo are redundant and shallow. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
2 hours ago, Snao Çoñé said:

if a lack of sex is always seen as bad, that is detrimental to the awareness and acceptance of asexuality, as in those cases a lack of sex is neutral if not good. Both you and I know how the persistent message that everyone wants sex can lead a person to having sex they don't want. The way to prevent that is of course not removing sexual content from media (there are all sorts of reasons that's a bad idea) but giving clearer and a more diverse range of messages. Even many sexual people think the headlines on the cover of Cosmo are redundant and shallow. :P

Wow.  This is just brilliant, Snao!  But I want to break it down and add to it, if I may...

 

Quote

Both you and I know how the persistent message that everyone wants sex can lead a person to having sex they don't want.

I can't begin to tell you how often *I* believe this has happened and continues to happen.  The message becomes, "Everyone "SHOULD" have sex, whether they want it or not, and if they don't, there's something "wrong" with them."  Which, of course, is nonsense. 

 

Quote

The way to prevent that is of course not removing sexual content from media (there are all sorts of reasons that's a bad idea) but giving clearer and a more diverse range of messages

Exactly. 

 

I wouldn't want to see sexual content removed from the media either, but I WOULD like to see the media (and other forms of communication)  communicate how diverse sexual interest....and disinterest is, and that it's O.K. to have no desire for partnered sex

 

Where did humans EVER get the idea that if we have a libido and we're "horny", that the "horniness" is "supposed" to be satisfied with a partner? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble

Please send me a porsche so I don't get cancer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
39 minutes ago, m4rble said:

Please send me a porsche so I don't get cancer.

LOL!!  M4rble, I don't know if it's you or me, but I'll tell ya...some of the posts you've written over the past few days have literally had me laughing so hard, I was in TEARS. 

 

If I ever get the money to buy you a porche, so you don't get cancer, I'll do my part. 

 

Promise...*still wiping tears*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Float On

suddenly I realize that sexual people probably like sex as much as I like kissing. which is a lot I'd kiss all day if it was realistic, which it isn't, so instead I kiss for like twenty minutes then we'd her hungry or our roommate would return home or whatever. random interruptions that unfortunately matter and then you forget 'cause your distracted.

 

 

wait but outside of a relationship - i like, never have urges to kissy anyone

 

 

wait but pan says that's normal, er, when translated to sex instead of as kissing...

 

'cause while I have a sexual's relationship with kissing and checking out babes, I have an ace's relationship with sex lol :P

 

on page two. hopefully I won't spam posts this time I'm trying to reserve responses to when I get to page 5 to stay current to the topics flow.... :unsure:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

It totally wouldn't surprise me to find out that cars are made with something that's later discovered to actually be a carcinogen, whereas Porsches are actually not made with that material.

 

Pretty much everything potentially causes at least ten kinds of cancer nowadays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble
17 minutes ago, vega57 said:

LOL!!  M4rble, I don't know if it's you or me, but I'll tell ya...some of the posts you've written over the past few days have literally had me laughing so hard, I was in TEARS. 

 

If I ever get the money to buy you a porche, so you don't get cancer, I'll do my part. 

 

Promise...*still wiping tears*

Let me know, I'll send you my adress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Law of Circles

Maybe some of the "sex is healthy and good" claims are being made to counter the fact that our society has historically viewed sex in a negative light (and still does to some degree, I would argue). There are still many people who believe that sex is an inherently evil and dirty act. As a result, many people still experience internalized feelings of guilt and shame over their sexuality, and for those people, it might be helpful to hear positive messages about sex. Sex can be a normal and healthy part of life for many sexual people.

 

Is it overdone sometimes? Yes. Still, I think it's not as simple as "society is hypersexual and obsessed with sex" because in a lot of ways, our society is still quite puritanical. There are conflicting norms about sex and sexuality that can be harmful for people on both sides of the spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Float On
On 9/28/2017 at 11:52 AM, vega57 said:

I'd agree with that. 

 

So, why can't the same thinking be applied to sex

(regarding the white water rafting analogy) 

 

(generally piggybacking this discussion with a thought, not criticizing Vega or anything, technically Vega was saying this in the context of society I belief but I'm responding to the context of mixed relationship woes)

 

 

but see, relationships and marriages fail because one partner loves white water rafting and the other just doesn't share in the passion, and doesn't participate or is too party-pooper about it. 

 

my sis basically broke up with a bf of 3 years because he sucked at being outdoorsy

 

her hubby  now, loves things she don't but they still click when they participate in them. and she loves running but he don't, but he goes to the races and if it's the right type runs for a mile or two and enjoys helping the administrative duties of organizing them and supports her whenever he can (running drains the body)

 he's her "spotter" in a sense, and social with her as well, as she enjoys her passion

 

 

 

it hurts to say it but, an asexual who can be the "spotter" for the sexual during sex will succeed. the ace who won't will lose the partner. and, the ace who fails to provide ace activities the sexual can be "spotter" for her, will find he feels useless and unimportant for her, and will lose him for his feeling unwanted.

 

obviously not universal but it's the same trend as any other passion. but somehow the aces often approach the relationship thinking like my sis's first boyfriend, who showed up to family tenting vacation with beers (beers were a shared interest and typically good but, it's weird for a tenting vacation especially as it puts demand on the cooler and slows the morning) and he thought it was enough to admire her energy and let my dad and sis and me and ma do all the work while he did nothing to rest from hiking. it was insulting, he was lazy, nothing wrong with being lazy and nothing wrong with being ace but there's a difference between being lazy and being realistic about your limits to conserve your energy to contribute as a "spotter" when needed, and a "spotter" for camping helps at mealtimes.

 

 

 

y'all hate me right now for my confusing analogies :lol: so to say it plainly and direct:

 

compromise isn't doing things you hate, compromise is finding a way to enjoy participating in the passion your partner has. it may take thinking outside the box. and for sure with asexuality being under the radar til now, education and marriage counseling would easily be appropriate. the purpose: finding a way to involve the ace in the sexual's passion, without the ace's limits being violated. finding a way to involve the sexual in the ace's language of love, si the sexual can feel wanted via proof of active social connectivity. verbal reassurances are empty when they become redundant but your fears have amplified....

 

 

 

 

for the camping trip, it's taking easy paths sometimes, and short-distance hard paths sometimes so the indoorsy guy can rest while the outdoorsy gal hikes the afternoon with her sis. then the guy has energy to be social via helping prepare dinner and etc, because his limits weren't violated, but respected. and it's him being able to say, I won't hike in the sun but I might enjoy that talent show the camp's hosting this evening. 

 

and of course it'd be the outdoorsy gal (or him) knowing not to take him to the grand canyon before he has a chance to learn how to"spot" her during a trip to the easier, cooler, not-a-desert Ricket's Glen. 

 

 

 

wish I had examples for sex "spotting" that respects the ace's limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Float On

socks? I adore  knee highs and thigh highs. 

 

IMO "sex" is best enjoyed with undies left on lol :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
2 hours ago, m4rble said:

Let me know, I'll send you my adress.

OM Friggin' G. 
 

Deal! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

 

Quote

 

Where did humans EVER get the idea that if we have a libido and we're "horny", that the "horniness" is "supposed" to be satisfied with a partner? 

 

Same place as we got the idea that hunger means we need food and being scared means we should hide. The people who didn't genetically have those urges died out. The few who are still like that, are, genetically speaking, anachronisms.

Share this post


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

 

Same place as we got the idea that hunger means we need food and being scared means we should hide. The people who didn't genetically have those urges died out. The few who are still like that, are, genetically speaking, anachronisms.

Also sentient human beings.....I didn't need urges to procreate. I knew how babies come about....lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Well that's evolutionary theory disposed of then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

@Snao Çoñé


So, sources for my assertion,

Quote

People fit what they read into their existing world view, and tend to reject what doesn't fit it. Again, there's a lot of research on this.

To get all @Pramana


It goes back to research into persuasion at Yale, and it's called the Cognitive Response Approach. Haven't read this book, but it looks like it's a good overview. Or there's Wikipedia.

 

From Richard Perloff's The Dynamics of Persuasion:

 

Quote

'People's own mental reactions to a message play a critical roll in the persuasion process, typically a more important role than the message itself'

For that particular quote, he cites experimental research (ie not academics just thinking out loud): 'Communication discrepancy and intent to persuade as determinants of counterargument production', TC Brock, from Journal of Experimental Social Pscyhology, 3, 1967; 'Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion and attitude change't, by AG Greenwald, Psychological Foundations of Attitudes, 1968; and 'Historical foundations of the cognitive response approach to attitudes and persuasion', RE Petty, TM Ostrom and TC Brock, 1981.

 

Perloff quotes Festinger and Maccoby (1964), also based on their research:

 

Quote

... it is more likely that ... while he [ie a research subject] is listening to the persuasive communication, he is very actively inside his own mind, counterarguing, derogating the points the communicator makes, and derogating the communicator himself.

Another Perloff quote, based on research:
 

Quote

When considering a message that touches on core values (capital punishment, abortion), they attend to the opponent's arguments, but reject them... Highly knowledgeable people with strong attitudes will muster all sorts of sophisticated reasons why the opponent's plan is a bad one. They will impress you with their ability to remember the other sides arguments, but in the end they will prove to be just as biased as anyone else.

 

... basing all that on 'Effects of involvement on persuasion:a meta-analysis', Johnson & Eagly, 1989, and 'Working knowledge and attitude strength: an information-processing analysis', Wood, Rhodes & Biek, 1995.

 

In other words, they're fitting the opposing argument into their existing world view - but under the heading 'wrong argument', because they're not at all persuaded.

 

More recent research suggests that people use their expertise and skills to pull apart counter arguments, so the more you know about a subject, the more you tend to dig your heels in against opposing views.

 

You did ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao van der Cone

Isn't it fun to spread your feathers, even if the peahens won't put out. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Isn't it fun to spread your feathers, even if the peahens won't put out

Where on earth did the idea that peahens might want to put out come from anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...