Jump to content

Archived

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

Remains of myself

Don't think I can handle a sexless future

Recommended Posts

Remains of myself

So I finally raised the issue of our lack of a sex life with my wife - we have skirted round the subject a bit before, but she has typically closed down the conversation in some way. We have been together for 10 years, married for two - I love her deeply and don't want to leave her or hurt her. I'm a very sexual person and this is killing me, I want to be understanding but right now I'm hurting so much and don't know what to do. She said that she thinks she is demi-sexual, though I can't help but think this is a halfway house for her and that what she wanted to say was asexual (like some gay people might test the water by labelling him or herself bisexual before identifying as gay). In a way "demi-sexual" hurts more - like I'm to blame for her lack of sexual desire for me. I don't know what else I could do to try and make her happy, in every other way we have a close and loving relationship and I do my best to treat her with kindness and respect. I feel now like a lot of our relationship has been built on deception though - she has said that she has only enjoyed sex on rare occasions and that she feels she never had any sort of "sexual awakening" like those her friends told her about when she was a teenager - she has never really masturbated, for example. I have also started to recognise that on occasions we HAVE had sex she has often, whether consciously or unconsciously, tried to effectively "turn me off" -  things like switching to manually stimulating me (which she knows I just don't like and never have, too cold and dry when I like warm and wet!) or talking in a really sentimental babyfied way about my penis which, again, she knows is not my thing (I'm not 5. It's a fucking cock, not an "aaaaah, look at willy, bless willy"!). We used to have sex a lot in the early days, but it's tapered off to almost nothing. She has said that she doesn't mind having sex with me if I want it, but this misses the point - I need to feel desired and there is nothing erotic to me about having sex with somebody who doesnt really want to - what kind of monster would enjoy THAT? It feels like she thinks of me as something like a dog who needs its glands squeezing now and again. I'm a very sexual person - in my 20s I was pretty much poly and had a lot of sex with a lot of people - this sometimes got emotionally messy and people got hurt, but DAMN at least I felt spiky and sexy and like life had possibilities. There was a time when I felt we were so well matched sexually. Now I feel alone and deceived - like as soon as we had kids, marriage and a mortgage she had got what she actually wanted and she can stop pretending that she actually wants me as anything more than provider and father - I never signed up for this and I don't have an option that doesn't involve pain for her, me and everybody I love most in the world - I don't want to cheat on her, I don't want to split up and hurt my kids, I don't feel that an open relationship would work for her in any way, I definitely don't want to use prostitutes. What the hell am I meant to do here? I'm 40 and feel too young to have sex so rarely, but too old and with too many responsibilities to others (most of all my children) to throw the undoubtedly great parts of my life away to start again. It's not the only thing in my life that's getting me down - I have a really (and I mean REALLY) stressful job and since my best friend emigrated I hardly have any friends anymore in the real world who actually care enough to look me up once in a while, but no sex is the cherry on my cake of shit and I am struggling to see any light at the end of the tunnel.

 

I am aware how selfish this all sounds and I honestly wish I could be as philosophical about this as some of the sexual partners of asexual people seem to be here - maybe sex shouldn't be this important to me, but it really is and crushing a part of my identity doesn't feel like an option. I understand that she is hurting too, and that I don't have automatic entitlement to her sexual desire - I've told her that and I'm trying to be supportive and loving with this. I'm so unhappy though and I genuinely fear for the future - my father killed himself in his 50s and I sometimes think that fate awaits me - that life will just grind me down and grind me down until living ceases to be an option - I don't want my kids to deal with that pain as I know how badly it affected me. I don't even have anybody to really talk to about this - the only friends I usually see are her friends, and as my previous social life involved far too much alcohol and drugs I was genuinely glad to leave a lot of it behind when I started a great relationship - rekindling that lifestyle is just not attractive to me in any way.

 

I would be grateful for any advice anybody here has.

 

ps. If you think you are asexual and haven't told your sexual partner, go do so immediately!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AmaechiJones

I sympathise, mate, I don't think you are selfish at all for wanting sex. In fact, with the 'immediate gratification mode' society has I'm surprised you haven't already left her. I think you should tell her that you don't feel you can handle never having sex again but want to continue the marriage. How can we work around it ? In some instances some spouses grant permission for extra-marital relations, especially if they are discreet and conducted safely. That said, it may be the end of your marriage altogether, if neither of you can reach a compromise. Have you thought about couples' counselling ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Deus Ex Infinity

I don't see any problem here. If you can't imagine a sexless future you should try to find someone to share. It's not selfish at all but a basic natural urge. Everything's gonna be ok  :D There's no reason to force or keep yourself away from anything at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remains of myself

Thank you for your response. I am torn about the idea of counselling - firstly, because I am not convinced of its effectiveness in many situations. I fear it may just make things worse by defining our relationship in terms of its most (for me at least) problematic part. Secondly, if my wife is stating this is not about what she "does", but what she "is", I am reluctant to do anything which is about "fixing" her when it's not that she is defective, but that this is her identity. If she is exploring her identity and finding meaning in a particular label then I don't even feel I have the right to challenge that for selfish reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
banoffeepie
36 minutes ago, Remains of myself said:

ps. If you think you are asexual and haven't told your sexual partner, go do so immediately!

you're right.

I can't offer you any great solutions as I pretended for so many years and then we eventually split when there weren't any compromises that kept us both happy.

 

All I can say is that if you have an option of splitting up or going the way of your father then the choice is clear. Get on with your life and live it free of everyone else's expectations. That's where I am now and it's amazing. I'm having the best time I've ever had, and I have four kids and I'm older than you too.

The kids don't care, in fact they are used to all their mates getting divorces. I'm closer to them now than I was before.

 

The pain of separating was short lived for me, and the relief was awesome. The relief for your wife might be similar, she must be feeling the usual asexual inadequacy guilt etc.

 

So I'm not advising splitting up but it can transform into a life you'd only dreamed of with no one being permanently hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
25 minutes ago, Deus Ex Infinity said:

I don't see any problem here. If you can't imagine a sexless future you should try to find someone to share. It's not selfish at all but a basic natural urge. Everything's gonna be ok  :D There's no reason to force or keep yourself away from anything at all.

Apparently, it's not a "basic natural urge" for his wife, nor is it for many other people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remains of myself

My youngest child would care - he's only 4 and I couldn't leave him, thankfully my wife and I do have a genuinely loving relationship despite this issue - it's a happy household in the main - my parents divorced when I was not much older than him and I remember the confusion and pain so vividly - my earliest strong memory is being told they were separating - these repeating patterns in families both fascinate and horrify me. My eldest child is not by my wife anyway, though he is over every weekend, they are very close and she is so loving to him (tbh I think he'd be happier to never see me than lose her!). On every level I really fear a situation where I would have two children I only see at weekends - I love my family unit and tearing it apart just doesn't feel an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
marriedtoanace
20 hours ago, vega57 said:

Apparently, it's not a "basic natural urge" for his wife, nor is it for many other people. 

Why did you find it necessary to add this.  For most of the population it's a basic natural urge.  We're all aware asexuality exists, that's why we're on this forum. 

Share this post


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

Why did you find it necessary to add this.  For most of the population it's a basic natural urge.  We're all aware asexuality exists, that's why we're on this forum. 

MOST of the population?  Got any universally accepted stats to prove that? 

Share this post


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

MOST of the population?  Got any universally accepted stats to prove that? 

Well yeah, the studies often cited on AVEN show that only around 1% of the population is asexual. For most of the rest of the people on the planet, sexual intimacy is a basic, natural urge, under some circumstances at least (like with a romantic partner for example.) If every other animal species on the planet has that, I don't see why you'd assume humans don't. We are animals, just in case you were confused about that, and animals have a natural urge to engage in sex, which is how they procreate. Humans generally have a much stronger drive than other animals (for the most part anyway) because it's much harder for us to get pregnant and we bear so few young at any one time, which is why 'evolution' gave us such a strong biological urge that generally still exists even if someone doesn't want kids. For the most part, we still want to have a fair bit of sex with people we are drawn to romantically and/or sexually. Without that urge, we never would have survived as a species, because our young remain helpless for the longest, we have no natural defenses, and we can't pump babies out the way rabbits, mice, cats etc do. Without the desire for sex (even before people really knew that sex is what causes pregnancy) we would have died out as a species. Yes, asexuals are an exception, but they're a very, very small exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
banoffeepie
22 hours ago, Remains of myself said:

My youngest child would care - he's only 4 and I couldn't leave him, thankfully my wife and I do have a genuinely loving relationship despite this issue - it's a happy household in the main - my parents divorced when I was not much older than him and I remember the confusion and pain so vividly - my earliest strong memory is being told they were separating - these repeating patterns in families both fascinate and horrify me. My eldest child is not by my wife anyway, though he is over every weekend, they are very close and she is so loving to him (tbh I think he'd be happier to never see me than lose her!). On every level I really fear a situation where I would have two children I only see at weekends - I love my family unit and tearing it apart just doesn't feel an option.

Hey, sure make it work that's the best.. but just to share as an example of it not being the end of the world. ..I was like that with my first divorce .. a daughter of three. The kids only care if there is acrimony, rows or bad mouthing between the parents and general bad feeling, that what does the damage. This is often the case before the split.

After, I dedicated my whole Sunday and Wednesday to my daughter and taking her places and having fun with her in a way I had never done before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darkwinterbird
1 hour ago, banoffeepie said:

 The kids only care if there is acrimony, rows or bad mouthing between the parents and general bad feeling, that what does the damage.  

Also damaging is an atmosphere of mysteriously simmering resentment and sorrow, which is exactly what this sort of situation generates.  Kids can feel it, even when their parents are careful to hide their unhappiness.  They feel it, and they blame themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
5 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Well yeah, the studies often cited on AVEN show that only around 1% of the population is asexual.

Yeah, right.  And, there were also "studies" that were done in the 1920s through the 60's that were later proved to be WRONG. 

 

I don't put a whole lot of faith in these "studies", because they only represent a SMALL percentage of the population, PLUS, the people who participate in them already have their own beliefs.  It was thought of that there were very "few" homosexuals around in the 1920s and even earlier.  One reason is because no one talked about it *shhhhhhhh*.  Didn't mean that it didn't happen. 

 

Quote

For most of the rest of the people on the planet, sexual intimacy is a basic, natural urge, under some circumstances at least (like with a romantic partner for example.) If every other animal species on the planet has that, I don't see why you'd assume humans don't.

Ficto, you really can't say "most" people on the planet do much of anything.  We also can't say that it's a "natural" urge.  There have been so many disputes about whether or not the "urge" is "natural", it ain't even funny.  We may as well debate whether or not God exists.  That's how hotly this idea (of the "urge" being "natural") is.  All you can tell me--and that I'll accept--is YOUR BELIEF that it's "natural".  And, unless and until that belief is PROVEN, to me, it's just an opinion...and NOT The Ultimate Truth. 


 

Quote

 

We are animals, just in case you were confused about that, and animals have a natural urge to engage in sex, which is how they procreate.

 

Yes, humans belong to the animal kingdom.  So do tigers, elephants and the like.  But we can't measure a tiger's reproductive and/or sexual capacity based on an elephant's reproductive and/or sexual capacity.  So, please let's measure humans by human standards. 

 

Oh, and, by the way...if you get to the point where you start insulting others, that tells me that you've already lost your argument.  Just like I can choose to be insulting, I can also choose NOT to be.  Kind of like, I can choose to have partnered sex or choose NOT have partnered sex. 

 

Quote

Humans generally have a much stronger drive than other animals (for the most part anyway) because it's much harder for us to get pregnant and we bear so few young at any one time, which is why 'evolution' gave us such a strong biological urge that generally still exists even if someone doesn't want kids.

This....makes no sense...

 

Hopefully, you can explain in further detail, what you mean...WITHOUT being condescending, o.k.?


 

Quote

 

For the most part, we still want to have a fair bit of sex with people we are drawn to romantically and/or sexually.

 

Some are, some aren't. 

 

Quote

Without that urge, we never would have survived as a species, because our young remain helpless for the longest, we have no natural defenses, and we can't pump babies out the way rabbits, mice, cats etc do.

While SOME people may have had that "desire", others don't/didn't.  Even if HALF of the planet TODAY didn't wish to have sex, the planet would still survive.  Why?  Because of the people who wish to procreate (NOT have sex for RECREATION), have MORE than ONE child.  Let's not forget that there was a point in time where women were taught that their ROLE in life was to procreate and be mothers.  Doesn't mean they necessarily WANTED to do this, but if they WANTED to survive, they didn't have much of a choice.

 

 

Share this post


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

---

 

 

Yes half the people on the planet could stop having sex right now and the population wouldn't be hugely negatively impacted, do you know why? Because humans fucked so much that they overpopulated the planet lol. Back when there were only a thousand humans alive on the planet, if half of them didn't want to fuck, our species would have died out. Sex was one of the most integral aspects to the survival of the human species for long enough that we now have a planet with somewhere around 7 billion people on it - That many humans didn't just magically appear, lol.. or do you think humans magically spawn like in videogames? Sexual humans, like every other animal, have an urge to have sex which is biologically encoded in our systems to ensure the survival of the species. Yes asexuals are the exception, everyone here knows that. 

 

When I say most sexual people, I do mean most sexual people. Most sexual people have an innate desire to connect sexually with some other people, under some circumstances. You can argue against that all you want, but everyone knows you're wrong and that asexuality is very, very uncommon. That's just a fact. If you can't deal with it that's fine but you really shouldn't come into sexual support threads and start spewing your inaccurate and flawed rhetoric where it isn't welcome or needed. 

 

If someone literally has no desire to have sexual intimacy with anyone, ever, they're not sexual, so when we say 'most sexual people have an urge to connect sexually with other people at least sometimes', we obviously aren't including those people. People like them (the asexuals) are very few and far between. There is nothing wrong with that, it's just a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl
7 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

People like them (the asexuals) are very few and far between. There is nothing wrong with that, it's just a fact.

I don't believe there are only 1% asexuals. In my opinion it's more likely around 5%.

 

To the author of this topic: have you considered non-monogamy? Maybe you should try carefully bringing up this topic with your wife. In a way, having a lover with the other partner's knowledge and permission is the best solution: the allosexual partner gets satisfaction again and the asexual partner can live a happily sex-free life. I would never support asexual partners forcing themselves to have sex, also because I know I couldn't and it just hurts me how "compromise" is perceived as the default.

 

Nobody should have sex unless they are really, absolutely sure that they want it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

I don't believe asexuals make up 1%, but I actually believe it's a lot less than that.

 

If there were that many of us (and honestly, let's face it, 1% of the population is still a whole *shitload* of people), we would not feel as alone as many of us often do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran

Honestly, whether it's 1%, 5%, or even 10%... that still means most of the population is sexual, not asexual. Asexual is a minority, though there is nothing wrong with that. But, despite not even IDing as asexual, I know I am not compatible with most people, as they are fully sexual and I am... not able to be compatible with that. Personally, I have no issue with someone saying it's a basic natural urge for most people, as the majority are sexual. 

 

OP - There is nothing selfish about not being able to live without it. But, that's a decision you'll have to make on what you want to do about it. I can tell you as someone who lived with parents who were unhappy with each other, I was happy when they divorced. I wasn't the only one, either. In my state, you have to take a "divorce class" if your parents divorce, to learn how to cope with it. About 90% of the class (which, there were maybe 20 kids there) agreed with me it was a good thing, cause they were sick of the tension, stress etc. You're not hiding from your kids that you're not happy. And you are their first introduction to relationships, so learning a toxic model of unhappiness and learning to suffer with each other will stick with them til they start their own relationships. It is absolutely no fun growing up with an unhappy parental unit that is just saying together "for the kids". 

 

The options for mixed relationships tend to be:

 

1) Compromise some way (which means both are happy, even if it's not ideal)

2) Open relationship (but this only works if both are actually into the idea for itself, it's not a bandaid fix for something missing)

3) Split up

 

Option #1 takes many forms and what works is up to the couple, usually decided after many, many hours of talking it out. I would not recommend cheating, as kids tend to find out eventually about that and it can cause resentment. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InariYana

 I believe there's more of us than 1%, but many are sex-neutral or sex-positive and they see themselves as somewhat sexual. If they examined their lives and kinds of attraction they experience, many would suddenly feel like "oh... so I actually don't experience sexual attraction at all... that's romantic/aesthetic attraction". Then maybe they'd just carry on with their lives with no need for a new label. I believe many aces who are not sex-repulsed never questioned their sexuality.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
marriedtoanace

lol @vega57 denying basic biology...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
10 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

 

Yes half the people on the planet could stop having sex right now and the population wouldn't be hugely negatively impacted, do you know why? Because humans fucked so much that they overpopulated the planet lol.

Did they do it because they actually WANTED to have sex or because they thought they were "supposed" to have it? 

 

Quote

Back when there were only a thousand humans alive on the planet, if half of them didn't want to fuck, our species would have died out.

Not necessarily true.  If half didn't have sex and the other half did, the human race would still survive.  After all, one woman is capable of producing more than one child during her reproductive lifetime (25-30 years).  My paternal grandmother had 15 children.  My maternal grandmother had only ONE.  My paternal grandmother didn't necessarily want to have sex, but it was the only way she could have children.  She did it because she believed it was her "duty" to produce children.  My maternal grandmother didn't even want the child she had.  She only had a child because she was told by a priest that it was her "duty".  From what I understood, she had no desire to reproduce OR have sex for pleasure. 

 

Quote

Sex was one of the most integral aspects to the survival of the human species for long enough that we now have a planet with somewhere around 7 billion people on it - That many humans didn't just magically appear, lol.. or do you think humans magically spawn like in videogames?

Your condescending sarcasm is unappreciated. 

 

Quote

Sexual humans, like every other animal, have an urge to have sex which is biologically encoded in our systems to ensure the survival of the species.

Once again, this is only ONE  theory.  Some believe that sex is innate, while others believe that it's something that's learned

 

Quote

When I say most sexual people, I do mean most sexual people. Most sexual people have an innate desire to connect sexually with some other people, under some circumstances

. Notice what I crossed out?  I'll agree with what you wrote ONLY with the strikethrough. 

 

Quote

You can argue against that all you want, but everyone knows you're wrong and that asexuality is very, very uncommon. That's just a fact. If you can't deal with it that's fine but you really shouldn't come into sexual support threads and start spewing your inaccurate and flawed rhetoric where it isn't welcome or needed. 

"Everyone"?  LOLOLOL.  

 

It's a "fact" that asexuality is very, very uncommon?  Sorry, but I don't think that ALL of the "facts" are 'in' yet to be able to determine just how widespread asexuality is...or isn't. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
14 minutes ago, marriedtoanace said:

lol @vega57 denying basic biology...

Sex is more than just biology. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonchaser
14 hours ago, vega57 said:

Yeah, right.  And, there were also "studies" that were done in the 1920s through the 60's that were later proved to be WRONG. 

 

I don't put a whole lot of faith in these "studies", because they only represent a SMALL percentage of the population, PLUS, the people who participate in them already have their own beliefs.  It was thought of that there were very "few" homosexuals around in the 1920s and even earlier.  One reason is because no one talked about it *shhhhhhhh*.  Didn't mean that it didn't happen. 

 

 

One of those studies, carried out in the UK, was of 18,000 subjects. I wouldn't call that a small sample for a study. It's probably fairly accurate, and I would think the real number of asexuals is actually higher than that 1%, because many romantic asexuals would probably have shown up as sexual in that particular study. The question had to do with sexual attraction, and many romantics who haven't thought much about how they experience attraction would likely have answered at that time that they did experience sexual attraction, just no sexual desire (that's how I would have answered, as I do experience sensual attraction, just don't want to carry it to the point of sex), so it's possible that study only captured aromantic asexuals with any certainty. My guesstimate, based on that, would be that there are between 1.5 and 2% of the population who are asexual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
57 minutes ago, Moonchaser said:

One of those studies, carried out in the UK, was of 18,000 subjects. I wouldn't call that a small sample for a study. It's probably fairly accurate, and I would think the real number of asexuals is actually higher than that 1%, because many romantic asexuals would probably have shown up as sexual in that particular study. The question had to do with sexual attraction, and many romantics who haven't thought much about how they experience attraction would likely have answered at that time that they did experience sexual attraction, just no sexual desire (that's how I would have answered, as I do experience sensual attraction, just don't want to carry it to the point of sex), so it's possible that study only captured aromantic asexuals with any certainty. My guesstimate, based on that, would be that there are between 1.5 and 2% of the population who are asexual. 

18,000 participants in a study doesn't give me much to go on.  How old were the participants?  How many of them were male?  Female?  Heterosexual?  Homosexual, bisexual, or lesbian?  How many had a religious influence?  What kind of influences did they have BEFORE participating in the study?  What part(s) of the country did the study take place? 

 

Questions of that nature.  For example, I wouldn't rely on a study of 100,000 (for example) college students from various colleges in the Deep South in the United States to be, what I'd consider to be "accurate" for ALL people from ALL walks of life. 

 

I agree that studies can "cross" when it comes to  answers.  For example, a woman may respond to the question, "How often do you HAVE sex with your partner?" much differently than she would answer, "How often do you WANT to have sex with your partner?". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
45 minutes ago, Moonchaser said:

One of those studies, carried out in the UK, was of 18,000 subjects. I wouldn't call that a small sample for a study. It's probably fairly accurate, and I would think the real number of asexuals is actually higher than that 1%, because many romantic asexuals would probably have shown up as sexual in that particular study. The question had to do with sexual attraction, and many romantics who haven't thought much about how they experience attraction would likely have answered at that time that they did experience sexual attraction, just no sexual desire (that's how I would have answered, as I do experience sensual attraction, just don't want to carry it to the point of sex), so it's possible that study only captured aromantic asexuals with any certainty. My guesstimate, based on that, would be that there are between 1.5 and 2% of the population who are asexual. 

18,000 participants in a study doesn't give me much to go on.  How old were the participants?  How many of them were male?  Female?  Heterosexual?  Homos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
45 minutes ago, Moonchaser said:

One of those studies, carried out in the UK, was of 18,000 subjects. I wouldn't call that a small sample for a study. It's probably fairly accurate, and I would think the real number of asexuals is actually higher than that 1%, because many romantic asexuals would probably have shown up as sexual in that particular study. The question had to do with sexual attraction, and many romantics who haven't thought much about how they experience attraction would likely have answered at that time that they did experience sexual attraction, just no sexual desire (that's how I would have answered, as I do experience sensual attraction, just don't want to carry it to the point of sex), so it's possible that study only captured aromantic asexuals with any certainty. My guesstimate, based on that, would be that there are between 1.5 and 2% of the population who are asexual. 

18,000 participants in a study doesn't give me much to go on.  How old were the participants?  How many of them were male?  Female?  Heterosexual?  Homosexual, bisexual, or lesbian?  How many had a religious influence?  What kind of influences did they have BEFORE participating in the study?  What part(s) of the country did the study take place? 

 

Questions of that nature.  For example, I wouldn't rely on a study of 100,000 (for example) college students from a college in the Deep South in the United States to be, what I'd consider to be "accurate" for ALL people from ALL walks of life. 

 

I agree that studies can "cross" when it comes to  answers.  For example, a woman may respond to the question, "How often do you HAVE sex with your partner?" much differently than she would answer, "How often do you WANT sex with your partner?". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
45 minutes ago, Moonchaser said:

One of those studies, carried out in the UK, was of 18,000 subjects. I wouldn't call that a small sample for a study. It's probably fairly accurate, and I would think the real number of asexuals is actually higher than that 1%, because many romantic asexuals would probably have shown up a

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl
54 minutes ago, Moonchaser said:

One of those studies, carried out in the UK, was of 18,000 subjects. I wouldn't call that a small sample for a study. It's probably fairly accurate, and I would think the real number of asexuals is actually higher than that 1%, because many romantic asexuals would probably have shown up as sexual in that particular study. The question had to do with sexual attraction, and many romantics who haven't thought much about how they experience attraction would likely have answered at that time that they did experience sexual attraction, just no sexual desire (that's how I would have answered, as I do experience sensual attraction, just don't want to carry it to the point of sex), so it's possible that study only captured aromantic asexuals with any certainty. My guesstimate, based on that, would be that there are between 1.5 and 2% of the population who are asexual. 

Which is why studies may be biased. When I think of it, I remember all the topic here with people asking "What is really that sexual attraction thing?", "How am I supposed to know if I feel sexual attraction if I don't know what it is?". From this point of view establishing a definition or, perhaps, just characteristics of the feeling described as "sexual attraction" is important because it could be more accurate in "catching" some asexuals who don't realize that they don't feel sexual attraction.

Since I support a broader understanding, I believe questionnaires should also ask about some things skightly different than attraction as such, such as attitudes towards sex. For example if someone considers statements such as "I don't care if I ever have sex" very fitting, it doesn't have to, but could indicate asexuality.

Share this post


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

I don't understand what the problem is here lol. It's like some people can't handle hearing that actual asexuality (not the 'i love having sex!' kind *eye roll*) might actually be *gasp* quite uncommon. Even if 5% of population was legitimately ace (though I, like Phillip, believe it's actually less than 1%) that's still very uncommon. Some people also can't seem to handle facts about very basic biology, and someone here (i won't name names) clearly missed a lot of biology classes in school.. or maybe they were raised in a very religious environment with no sex education or something. That's no excuse to come into support threads and start arguments with actual sexual people though, who do know what it's like to desire sexual intimacy (and in many cases here are also suffering because they're not getting it).

 

Regarding sexual attraction, as some people have brought it up: AVEN (in the FAQ) defines it as 'the desire for sexual contact with someone else' and while a lot of the FAQ is a mess, it's correct that what makes someone 'not sexual' is that they have no desire to connect sexually with others for pleasure, ever, which is extremely rare.

 

9 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

"I don't care if I ever have sex" very fitting, it doesn't have to, but could indicate asasexuality' 

'I don't care if I never have sex again' is a pointless question because there are sexual people like that (I am one, despite having a very high libido). You only need to ask 'do you desire partnered sexual intimacy for pleasure?' and (for romantic people) 'for you, is partnered sex something you desire for intimacy and pleasure in your romantic relationships?' These are the questions that give the strongest indications someone may be ace..and believe me, none of the sexual partners in this thread would ever have needed to have come to AVEN if 'asexuals' could answer "yes" to either of those questions - because their 'ace' partners would be no different than any other sexual person. 

 

Vega, why come to this subforum if it's going to upset you so much and you're just going to try to pick fights with people who are trying to give sexuals advice and support in support threads? Go to Hot Box and have a bitch about how sex is a learned behaviour and most sexual people don't ever actually want it, and how all the sexuals who say they sometimes experience an actual urge for partnered sex are wrong about their own bodies, whatever, but here is not the place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iff

I think we've gone a bit off-topic on this thread. Bear in mind that the opening poster is looking for some advice and help with the situation they have.

 

Please feel free to discuss the rate of asexuality in a more appropriate thread or start one in that regard.

 

Thanks,

Iff,

Moderator, sexual partners, friends & allies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrDane

1% or 5%? I would argue, that most people are still sexual and keep in mind, that some aces can actually enjoy parts of the sex and some sexuals have a practical non-existing lust for sex. 

 

OP was about "handling a sexless future" or to put it in other words; to wonder whether it is possible to live a happy life without that thing which, at this point, makes you more happy than anything. And where the lack of it, makes you feel miserable. I sure understand the wondering. And it is stressful.

if my wife told me, that we were going to live in another country (forever), which i didnt like. Told me to get a new job, when i liked my job. Told me that the house/future that we have built together and planned on (...or so I thought!) staying and keep working on, were to be sold and now we should live in a way, that I didnt choose and wouldt have agreed to choose, then I think it would be understandable if I said no, honey. This is to stressful.I aint going. You want this, but i dont.  ...but of course a sound relationship will let people involved evolve and change. You have to be accepting and patient and allow mistakes, forgive, move on..yada-yada-yada...

 

Bottomline is, at what point does your chances to be happy reach a dead stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...