Flump222

Autochorissexual Masturbation Question

Recommended Posts

Flump222

(Possibly TMI, I don't know)

I just kind of wanted to ask about the typical autochorissexual view on masturbation. So, I think that I do fall into this category, and I just wanted to share my feelings here (this is pretty much the only place that I'm comfortable talking or posting about this kind of stuff). I know that the definition of autochorissexuality is a disconnect between one and one's object of sexual desire, so you one can be attracted to the act but not want oneself in it. I'm pretty sure I fall into this, but I just want to ask if my view of masturbation is typical of someone like this.

Okay, here goes.

So, when I first started to try to masturbate, I'm not really sure why I kept trying to do it. I think it's just because I just wanted to feel this pleasure that seemed to come with it. After that first time I did it for a while before I discovered that if I tried to fantasize it would end faster (and it was my goal just to do it as fast as possible, I don't know why). To be honest though, I did have to put a lot of effort into doing it, and I can't remember thinking about me being involved in the sex (this is just from memory though). Now I don't even bother. Also, when I first started I felt like crap almost every time I did it, I felt disgusted at myself. Now, I just don't really feel anything. Immediately afterward I just snap right back into normal mode and go back to whatever I was doing. Also, I do sometimes view, uh, "certain images". However, when I do so, I don't really care about who's doing what. Even though some images of the same act arouse me more than others (I don't know why). (Also, the most arousing things to me only involve one person. I don't know if that relates to being autochorissexual but I thought I might as well put it here). 

So, does this seem like how someone that autochorissexual (as opposed to allosexual) would view this? Again, sorry if this is stupid and TMI, but I'm just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie

tbh I still dunno what autochorissexual really is supposed to be. 

 

Bottom line is, some asexuals masturbate, or even use erotic media to assist their masturbation drive. it's more nuanced than that, but you don't need to get into the details to "get" that there are many asexuals who can and do masturbate. 

 

3 hours ago, Flump222 said:

I'm not really sure why I kept trying to do it.

could be any reason. boredome, libido, habit, escapism, interest, curiosity, self-annihilism or frustration, just cause your body is there and you can use it, whatever lots of random reasons. 

 

3 hours ago, Flump222 said:

So, does this seem like how someone that autochorissexual (as opposed to allosexual) would view this?

 

couldn't tell ya either way, people of all orientations have all kinds of interests, hang-ups, lack of interest, or shame in masturbation. it depends on the individual. one could theorize that someone sexual might be more likely to enjoy or be into masturbation but, where/s the data? don't make assumptions about other people ;) 

 

what matters is whether or not you feel a drive for sexual contact with others, or sexual attraction towards partcular people. if either of these occur, you're probably grey or sexual. if neither occor for you, you're ace. 

 

I think that autochorissexual is supposed to be "someone who feels sexual attraction or desire in fiction or fantasy media only" but I'm not sure don't quote me on it. 

 

 

ah, I found a good page that describes it well. 

 

basically - an ace who masturbates is autochorissexual. it's the formal term for "libido'd ace" - someone who has some kind of libido, aka a "sex-drive" but with "sex" absent in that drive - it's arousal and masturbation only. someone who masturbates, gets aroused by porn/etc.... but their libido doesn't translate into desire towards having sex. They're as uninterestd in sex as any other ace, but got some libido happening for them. 

 

linky

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name

Autochorisexualism is in play whenever someone (who's most likely ace) feels a disconnect between their sexual identity and the target of their arousal/desire/whatever. It's considered a paraphilia, and it usually occurs alongside asexuality (i.e. you can identify as both autochorisexualist and ace because autochorisexualism isn't necessarily a sexual orientation).

 

An autochorisexualist might fantasize, but only be able to view it in third-person without the fantasies becoming a distraction. They might be able to fantasize about fictional characters, but never about real people. They might feel a sharp disconnect between themselves and their sexuality. They might masturbate and enjoy it, but feel as if they "don't have permission" to. It manifests itself in many different ways, but (from what I've seen on this site) the overall experience of feeling that disconnect appears to be quite common amongst aces.

 

Hope this helps!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie

oh it looks like... autochorissexual is the term Bogaert coined, but his presentation of the idea leans a lot more heavily on the paraphernalia, kink aspect, or potentially criticized "disconnect/disassotiation" as if it were a problem or a health issue. Naturally, those who want to raise acceptence and awareness for this aspect of many people's healthy sexuality, did not like how he presented the term...

 

and so it seems that the people who use the concept as a way to identify who they are according to their (a)sexuality, are trying to popularize the alternative label, "aegosexual" 

 

I think that there's too much of a lean towards bogaerts original framework - that aegosexuality can still adjust to be more appropriate as an orientation. Its definition really speaks to the people who experience that (a)sexuality, but its wording could be improved - so generally I think it is better to think of aegosexuality as... (tentative) "A person whose sexuality either leads to self-intimacy or fantasy, or responds to sexual imagery or other such media and fantasy, but this libido does not involve an interaction between them being involved with another human being" or something IDK. Basically it is when libido has enough about it that is similar to attraction or desire, and yet is divorced from sexual intimacy with others. 

 

Some aces can have libido without being aegosexual, and no one is forcing any ace to identify as aegosexual if they want. but also, aegosexual isn't limited just to aces, there could be someone who is aego as an ace, or as a grey, or as an allosexual. It is up to the individual to decide if they are ace, allo, grey. 

 

I think I'm going to start identifying as an aegosexual grey. or something. idk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl

"Aegosexual" is phonetically wrong. It should be anegosexual - the same mechanism as in English articles: a house, but an apple.

Autochorissexuality/anegosexuality is just a relatively minor phenomenon. I tend to explain it as "tendency to fantasize in third person" because it's much easier to understand than "sense of disconnection etc.". I don't think that it's limited to aces, but seems to be relatively more common among libidoist aces than among allosexuals. However, not every libidoist ace is autochorissexual.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flump222
3 hours ago, float on said:

"A person whose sexuality either leads to self-intimacy or fantasy, or responds to sexual imagery or other such media and fantasy, but this libido does not involve an interaction between them being involved with another human being"

Yes. I can completely relate to this.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie
3 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

"Aegosexual" is phonetically wrong. It should be anegosexual - the same mechanism as in English articles: a house, but an apple.

Autochorissexuality/anegosexuality is just a relatively minor phenomenon. I tend to explain it as "tendency to fantasize in third person" because it's much easier to understand than "sense of disconnection etc.". I don't think that it's limited to aces, but seems to be relatively more common among libidoist aces than among allosexuals. However, not every libidoist ace is autochorissexual.

ah, that makes sense. 

 

Is there a reason why anegosexual/autochorissexual is considered a phenomenon as opposed to an orientation? I do not know much about it. there's a long thread I wanna read through when I have the time... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Willgracefan

I identify as autochorissexual because of the disconnection aspect. I always found it was odd that I was so attracted to gay men. I’d seek out movies with gay couplets and YouTube videos. I just thought it was normal because I was a “straight” female so duh, why wouldn’t this turn me on. I quickly learned that nope, most straight females don’t feel the same way.   I masterbated during my teenage years and beyond but I was just to get the release not something I did thinking about having sex, certainly. Now in my late 30’s I only masterbate when I’m drunk and I have come to watch porn while doing it but I can’t watch straight sex, nope, never! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name
1 hour ago, float on said:

ah, that makes sense. 

 

Is there a reason why anegosexual/autochorissexual is considered a phenomenon as opposed to an orientation? I do not know much about it. there's a long thread I wanna read through when I have the time... 

Bogaert specifically called it a phenomenon or paraphilia because it occurs in some asexual people, but not all of them. Here is his original definition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie
31 minutes ago, Fantastic Name said:

Bogaert specifically called it a phenomenon or paraphilia because it occurs in some asexual people, but not all of them. Here is his original definition.

Yes; But Bogaert also said numerous things about it that chalked it up to a kink or a mental health issue, and so there are people who are claiming anegosexual as an orientation. I am not sure very much about the whole history yet tho. I want to research this in a lot more depth. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Entmoot

Before reading about what "autochorissexual" means through AVEN (or maybe some research article), I didn't even consider that other people include themselves in their fantasies. So I guess this applies to me. However, although my "fantasies" (i.e. what I think about during masturbation) involve people--one person at a time, like the OP--they don't have sex in them. So are they actually "sexual fantasies?" This is important (if one cares about asexuality research) because a lot of researchers seem to be asking asexuals whether they have sexual fantasies, and a certain percentage say yes while some say no. But are they clearly defining what a sexual fantasy even is? Is there or should there be another term for a sexual fantasy that doesn't involve any sex acts, or would that be true of a lot of people's (even allosexuals') fantasies?

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Is there or should there be another term for a sexual fantasy that doesn't involve any sex acts, or would that be true of a lot of people's (even allosexuals') fantasies?

In an attempt to answer my own question, I started to look into research on sexual fantasy in general, not just in terms of asexuality. While there is a very generic definition:

 

"the term sexual fantasy refers to almost any mental imagery that is sexually arousing or erotic to the individual" (Leitenberg & Henning, 1995)

 

...which would have to include any thoughts one has during masturbation, even if they're about a magical forest or the number 72, a more recent study seems to assume explicit sexual content. The study is pretty interesting, as it attempts to objectively determine which "unusual" sexual fantasies are actually rare vs. typical in the general population (as reflected by 1,517 adults in Quebec). I can't access the full paper, but this article has the full list of 55 statements and the % of women and men who responded as having had each fantasy. Of these, I count only 7 statements don't contain or imply actual sex acts:

Spoiler

 

-atmosphere and location are important in my sexual fantasies

-tying someone up to obtain sexual pleasure

-watching someone undress without him or her knowing

-spanking or whipping someone to obtain sexual pleasure

-being spanked or whipped to obtain sexual pleasure

-showing myself naked or partially naked in a public place

-wearing clothing associated with the opposite sex

 

 

And notice that all but the first of these (which isn't really a fantasy but a statement about fantasies) are subjective--that is, there's a sense of oneself being part of the fantasy. Even the voyeuristic fantasies are subjective, because they're about oneself watching [fill in the blank] rather than the fantasy just being [fill in the blank].

 

So to cut a long story short, if the above survey is anything to go by, "normal" sexual fantasies have both a subjective sense of self and contain sex acts. However, I don't think this study asked any open-ended questions, so it's limited by whatever the researchers thought to include in their survey. But the fact that they didn't even include items like "two men making love" (with no verb...as opposed to "watching two men making love") or just "a sexy woman just existing by herself" suggests to me that these would not be considered typical.

 

I'm personally ok with the term "autochorissexual" and even with it being called a "paraphilia," although I understand how that has a negative connotation. I haven't seen  Bogaert directly call this a problem or "mental health issue," though I haven't read everything he's written. To me he's just trying to characterize an atypical aspect of sexuality and is drawing on terminology from other atypical sexual behaviors. But of course, perhaps asexual people would rather not be associated with so-called "sexual deviants" in any way...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name

(TMI warning, ma-a-aybe...?)

 

1 hour ago, Entmoot said:

Are they actually "sexual fantasies?" This is important (if one cares about asexuality research) because a lot of researchers seem to be asking asexuals whether they have sexual fantasies, and a certain percentage say yes while some say no. But are they clearly defining what a sexual fantasy even is?

Agreed 100%. In particular, there's this notion that sexual fantasies are primarily visual. I am completely incapable of fantasizing visually without it distracting me and turning me off. When people ask me if I fantasize, I just tell them I don't, to avoid complicating things. However, I can and do "fantasize" using my sense of touch. Imagining how something might physically feel or the memory of how a certain sensation felt can be extremely arousing to me. I don't include myself or anyone else in those thoughts; it's a very impersonal thing. I wonder if that counts as a sexual fantasy?

 

Regardless, I still feel that strong disconnect between myself and my sexuality, so I'm still autochori. But, it really does raise the question: What is a sexual fantasy?

Edited by Fantastic Name
clarification
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Entmoot
6 minutes ago, Fantastic Name said:

 However, I can and do "fantasize" using my sense of touch. Imagining how something might physically feel or the memory of how a certain sensation felt can be extremely arousing to me. I don't include myself or anyone else in those thoughts; it's a very impersonal thing. I wonder if that counts as a sexual fantasy?

That's so interesting! When I was writing my previous post, I did stumble over going from "mental imagery" to just "thoughts" as if they're the same. You might be interested in this quote from that same 1995 article; it's from the paragraph immediately before the one defining sexual fantasy:

 

"In general, a fantasy or daydream (the two are not usually distinguished) is considered an act of the imagination, a thought that is not simply an orienting response to external stimuli or immediately directed at solving a problem or working on a task."

 

By that definition I think yours counts as a fantasy (whether it's "sexual" or not is, I think, up for debate). But as you point out, there's a real bias toward the visual. It's even in our language: "imagine" implies mental image. Are there non-visual images? This is a question for cognitive science and philosophy...forget this sexology nonsense!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name
8 minutes ago, Entmoot said:

Whether it's "sexual" or not is, I think, up for debate

No, those thoughts are definitely sexual, but I'm not going to get into the specifics of it all; too uncomfortable. <_<

 

32 minutes ago, Entmoot said:

"In general, a fantasy or daydream (the two are not usually distinguished) is considered an act of the imagination, a thought that is not simply an orienting response to external stimuli or immediately directed at solving a problem or working on a task."

This definition really intrigued me. I will say that having those physical thoughts requires a conscious effort on my part. I have to willingly decide I want to focus on them in order for them to happen in the first place. I've read in a few different articles that sexual fantasies are sometimes spontaneous, but those thoughts aren't. I don't know if that has to do with my asexuality or autochorissexualism or what, but from what I can piece together it probably isn't how most people fantasize.

 

40 minutes ago, Entmoot said:

But as you point out, there's a real bias toward the visual. It's even in our language: "imagine" implies mental image. Are there non-visual images? This is a question for cognitive science and philosophy...forget this sexology nonsense!

I think it all depends on what you call a mental image. People sometimes describe mental imagery (in general) as including not just what you see, but also the atmosphere, smells, emotions, sounds -- everything that's around them. I think it all varies from person to person, to be honest.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl

For me ANY thought - including erotic fantasies - is almost exclusively verbal, to the point that I speak whole sentences in my thoughts. I can switch to thinking in a different language (English? No problem...), but not to thinking in a different "mode" - I just don't have visual imagination.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flump222

First off, thanks for all of the responses. They have gotten me thinking though. Do you all think that I fall into this category? I used to be pretty sure, but I guess I just want some outside input (I've never been good at just doing things myself without said input). To be honest, now that I think about it I don't think that I involve myself in my fantasies. Sometimes I think I do, but a vast majority of the time I think I don't (though those doubts are still there, be they grounded in reality or not).  I just can't seem to come to a consensus with myself on this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name
8 minutes ago, Flump222 said:

First off, thanks for all of the responses. They have gotten me thinking though. Do you all think that I fall into this category? I used to be pretty sure, but I guess I just want some outside input (I've never been good at just doing things myself without said input). To be honest, now that I think about it I don't think that I involve myself in my fantasies. Sometimes I think I do, but a vast majority of the time I think I don't (though those doubts are still there, be they grounded in reality or not).  I just can't seem to come to a consensus with myself on this.

Based on both the OP and this, you sound pretty autochori to me, but I really can't make that decision for you. If you feel like you might fit the definition and want to consider yourself autochori right now, then by all means go right ahead. You can always adjust your identity if you ever feel like it might not suit you. Labels can always be changed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie
13 hours ago, Entmoot said:

However, although my "fantasies" (i.e. what I think about during masturbation) involve people--one person at a time, like the OP--they don't have sex in them. So are they actually "sexual fantasies?" T

heh I have the same qestion about myself. my fantasies seem to reward me sexually, reward my liido... but they are barely even romantic in nature. mostly it is me coming up with an interesting character and giving them backstory and storytelling some.

 

I guess I do self-insert at times. but when I do, it's very hard to involve sexual or romantic interaction without it being imagined as hard or hurtful for me :unsure: IDK. huh... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie

idk if I'm autochoris but...

 

 

my sexual fantasies are like.. literally.. me telling a story... when I'm already horny... and there's some kind of "intention" that there'll be a sexual expereince in the fantasy but... if I do ever include sex, it's either descriptive of what happened, excluding the details... or it's something uh, I'm removed from. i might feel a part of the story but, not a part of the sexuality/romance that happens in it. if it happens, it happens to me; someone else has the feelings. 

 

so I guess I would describe my sexual fantasy as, "a daydream that helps me to feel the sensations of my libido and arousal. They can tend to involve sexual implications or sexual events, but don't always, and rarely am I consenting or enthusiastically involved in any sex that happens to me, if I am even self-inserted in the story at all" 

 

the key things I note is - story telling, and my body being with libido experience. and they feed/fuel each other. that is what a sexual fantasy is for me. 

 

I more often daydream without any sexual or romantic context though. tho I've been trying to curb that 'cause it's been maladaptive daydreaming for me in my past. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie
12 hours ago, Entmoot said:

But as you point out, there's a real bias toward the visual. It's even in our language: "imagine" implies mental image. Are there non-visual images? This is a question for cognitive science and philosophy...forget this sexology nonsense!

I have no visual experience in either my memory nor my imagination nor my working memory nor my thoughts. I actually only experience tactile sensation in those aspects of my consiousness... the only time I have anything more than 1) the concept of the idea 2) the tactile sensation associated with the thought/memory 3) a soundless internal dialogue which honestly I had to develop to use in any significant way.... 

 

I have nothing beyond those three "senses" in my thoughts/memories. only in real-time sensation of the environment and events in real-time, or in my dreams. 

 

But nonetheless... visual words I use as if they make sense. For me, it is basically, that visual and audio experiences get interpretted, translated, into tactile-based memory and thought. So, There are distinct aspects to my tactile memory that is "visual" or "audible" even tho there is no visual or audio sensation to it. So it makes sense. 

 

but, it was a lot easier for me to connect with my own thoughts more effectively, when I figured all this out. like, for the longest time I had problems where glaring light blinds me... I still "see" all the stuff by my brain just can't process what's going on.. but when I realized that I experience these things with a tactile sensation too. I just learned to notice and focus on that, to understand what was going on. the glare is still annoying but... I now know how to not feel blinded by it.. .And it is similar to memory. When I herad people talking about visualizing the future to try to help sort things out... it was hard at first... but then when I realized, that "visualizaition" meant simply, representing in some way what occurs. I focused instead on the structural aspect of stepping through things in anticipation of what might happen and what I mgiht do... and then letting the tactile memory "visualize" on its own accord automatically... 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie
12 hours ago, Fantastic Name said:

People sometimes describe mental imagery (in general) as including not just what you see, but also the atmosphere, smells, emotions, sounds -- everything that's around them. I think it all varies from person to person, to be honest.

xD hehe for me it just don't work this way. it is like this for me... I feel the weight, and motion, of the thought in my head, as if it's an object. like an iceberg, that represents the entirety of the thought... but all the details? I don't directly experience them, only implicitly, if I need details I can focus on that one detail, maybe two, but then the rest of the "iceberg" so to speak... is harder to keep track of... haha! 

 

I've had to teach myself to use internal dialogue in order to try to track those details better xD it was actually surprisingly helpful, learning to use language in my thoughts. allowed me to have stronger conclusion, better working memory, and better learning. also let me grab hold of my ideas better. and, it allowed me to express myself better too. Because... since my thoughts are so... abstracted... it's sooo hard to get them into language... oh, shoot. both are abstractions. I never know how to explain them as different. language is a symbol that represents, and in that way is abstract. but what is represented is abstract too.. it is contextual abstraction... so the context of my thoughts are so clear and real for me... but translating it into the symbolism of words is difficult. or, uh, well, it was. Idk. 

 

 

 

I am sorry I'm writing so much D: 

 

 

I am sorry I'm writing so much D:   and I didn't edit of it so it's all just word dump. probably with gramar and spelling hiccups... I am so sorry :unsure: I'm not supposed to be on aven right now... xD 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name
1 hour ago, float on said:

I have no visual experience in either my memory nor my imagination nor my working memory nor my thoughts. I actually only experience tactile sensation in those aspects of my consiousness... the only time I have anything more than 1) the concept of the idea 2) the tactile sensation associated with the thought/memory 3) a soundless internal dialogue which honestly I had to develop to use in any significant way.... 

 

I have nothing beyond those three "senses" in my thoughts/memories. only in real-time sensation of the environment and events in real-time, or in my dreams. 

 

But nonetheless... visual words I use as if they make sense. For me, it is basically, that visual and audio experiences get interpretted, translated, into tactile-based memory and thought. So, There are distinct aspects to my tactile memory that is "visual" or "audible" even tho there is no visual or audio sensation to it. So it makes sense. 

Most of my thoughts and memories are almost exclusively through my internal monologue, and this description of how you think is exactly me. I can hear my internal monologue, but it's silent. I can't even make out voices in it, but I can hear it and see it anyway somehow.

 

Brains are weird.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie

what else is weird is forum glitches :o wow 67 notifications, I feel loved :D

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name

How many of these things have I posted?!

 

Everyone who's following this, I'm so sorry.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer
29 minutes ago, Fantastic Name said:

How many of these things have I posted?!

64, if I counted correctly :D you really wanted to get your point across, didn't you?

 

Carry on :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Entmoot

@float on and @Fantastic Name, have you seen this thread here on aphantasia? It seems highly relevant! I can't personally relate to lacking visual imagination (although I'm not sure my mental visuals are particularly vivid), but it looks like a lot of others here can.

 

But that's fascinating that you apparently do dream visually, @float on. To bring the conversation slightly back on track, do autochorissexual people ever have sex dreams? I don't think I ever have. For me this makes sense because almost all of my dreams (that I can remember) have me as the protagonist. But dreams don't always have to be in the first person...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Entmoot
On 2/13/2018 at 10:22 PM, Flump222 said:

First off, thanks for all of the responses. They have gotten me thinking though. Do you all think that I fall into this category? I used to be pretty sure, but I guess I just want some outside input (I've never been good at just doing things myself without said input). To be honest, now that I think about it I don't think that I involve myself in my fantasies. Sometimes I think I do, but a vast majority of the time I think I don't (though those doubts are still there, be they grounded in reality or not).  I just can't seem to come to a consensus with myself on this.

From what you've written here it sounds like you fall into this category most of the time, but it's hard for me to say without knowing more details of your fantasies, which I don't really want and I suspect you don't want to give ;) But maybe as an experiment you could try to conjure up a fantasy in which you're definitely playing an active role (or a passive role...just some kind of role in the action) and see how it feels. If it feels different from what you normally experience, I'd say that's a good indication of autochorrissexulism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic Name
4 hours ago, Entmoot said:

@float on and @Fantastic Name, have you seen this thread here on aphantasia? It seems highly relevant! I can't personally relate to lacking visual imagination (although I'm not sure my mental visuals are particularly vivid), but it looks like a lot of others here can.

I don't have aphantasia. I was just sorta referring to my day-to-day stream of consciousness when I said that. I mean, I can picture stuff in my head, but it's not something I do unless I'm trying to. Still pretty interesting, though.

 

4 hours ago, Entmoot said:

Do autochorissexual people ever have sex dreams? I don't think I ever have. For me this makes sense because almost all of my dreams (that I can remember) have me as the protagonist. But dreams don't always have to be in the first person...

I know this wasn't exactly directed at me, but I don't have sex dreams either. I mean, I've had dreams with sexual content, but they aren't erotic or anything and I'm never actually partaking in it. In fact, as soon as sex enters my dreams, I usually act completely in-character and try to get my ass outta there as soon as possible! :lol:

Regardless of content, most of my dreams are in third-person and are almost entirely visual.

 

On 2/14/2018 at 9:52 AM, float on said:

I've had to teach myself to use internal dialogue in order to try to track those details better xD it was actually surprisingly helpful, learning to use language in my thoughts. allowed me to have stronger conclusion, better working memory, and better learning. also let me grab hold of my ideas better. and, it allowed me to express myself better too. Because... since my thoughts are so... abstracted... it's sooo hard to get them into language... oh, shoot. both are abstractions. I never know how to explain them as different. language is a symbol that represents, and in that way is abstract. but what is represented is abstract too.. it is contextual abstraction... so the context of my thoughts are so clear and real for me... but translating it into the symbolism of words is difficult. or, uh, well, it was. Idk. 

I can't believe I didn't read this part! :o As someone who writes almost constantly (no, seriously), this was really interesting! When I first started writing out my crap on a regular basis, I took words at face value and only used them the way the dictionary told me to. But over time, with more and more practice, I started to use the words in a different way. Different words just started to have all these different sounds, connotations, flavors, and feelings with them, and using them would give my stuff this particular "flow" to them, if that makes any sense. It's like I slowly just sorta developed the ability to convey things that words alone cannot. I dunno. This is another one of those weird, abstract things that's really hard to explain in words, ironically enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rinnie

Yup, aphantasia. Also synesthesia. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now