Jump to content

A question for asexuals


anamikanon

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I think we all tend to (in all good faith) bung in a sentence acknowledging the other side of the equation and then make our own point at somewhat greater length. 

If you read my posts you'll see I mention it extensively (take my last long post in this thread as one example) however obviously my own part is going to have more words because I'm describing my own personal experience, not the other person's. I know you skim a lot of my comments as you don't like my writing style, but I often mention the sexual side of it at least once in every paragraph I type and Serran mentions the sexual side repeatedly too in every almost comment she makes about her own suffering in her past relationships.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

 

Well, Serran and I do keep mentioning, repeatedly, how it can be just as bad for the sexual person forced to live in celibacy, we'll often even try to go into detail to explain WHY it can be really painful for a sexual person to be forced into celibacy against their will. This is almost a 'default' disclaimer to every one of our comments as we mention it so often. I wonder if maybe some people just skim our posts and think we're just perpetually moaning about hard it can be for an ace, when we actually both try to constantly remind everyone that a sexual can suffer just as much from being forced to live in celibacy. We're not the only ones who always try to make that clear as well, many aces talking about making sexual sacrifice will often be sure to remind everyone that it can be just as bad for a sexual being forced into celibacy. So it won't get lost unless everyone misses it when they read our posts, because it's definitely almost always there :)

when each post is a five page essay, I don't want to be my English professor. Yeah I'll skim it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, basically, everything you can say about either side can be said in reverse for the other side. Mixed relationships are hard and can be very painful and when two sides can't be compatible at all in that department, then it becomes a big mess with hurt everywhere. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, squaggly said:

when each post is a five page essay, I don't want to be my English professor. Yeah I'll skim it.

So if you've skimmed it, maybe not jump to the conclusion that one 'side' is by default ignoring the other side's pain or causing it to somehow be lost? Because if you read my last long comment here, seriously actually read it, you'll see the sexual side of it is mentioned repeatedly and I even dedicated an entire paragraph to that side of it at the end of the comment, and that's how I always try to formulate my posts. Serran will often do the same thing. You don't have to read our comments of course, but don't jump to conclusions about what we were saying in them if you didn't thoroughly read them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

I'd also often bite my hands or arms to try to detract from the pain 'down there'. Sometimes those kinds of distractions are the only thing that can make it bearable. I actually have a chronic pain disorder called vestibulodynia that causes excruciating pain upon penetration (or even during oral which my partner always insisted on giving me for ages every day Y_Y).. By the end of it you're raw,  the labia swells up, you're in agonizing pain, and can't even walk properly (feels like having boiling water poured in your hooha), and the pain isn't gone before the next time you have to have sex. But that's just one of the prices you have to pay to try to keep your partner happy sometimes (just as the sexual person living in total celibacy suffers badly a lot of the time, but they remain in the relationship despite the pain because that's the price of staying)... However, people keep saying things like 'that doesn't sound consensual' 'that's not compromise' etc.. and that's part of the point we are making. (well, I am making anyway). While for some mixed relationships the sexual person has to do 100% of the compromise and suffer with no sex, there are others where the asexual has to do all the compromise and give as much sex as they are able no matter how much they don't want it. It's not any less valid of a mixed relationship experience just because it sounds a bit 'rapey' though (It's actually not rapey anyway because it's fully consensual, just seems that way maybe in comparison to 'healthy' relationship dynamics).

I am sorry, but we just agree to disagree here. This does not make sense.

 

Neither the ace nor the sexual doing these kinds of sacrifices is right. If the ace has a problem with repulsion or pain, I still think they should be seeking middle ground instead of shunning the sexual. This may even mean initiating an opening of the marriage if any sexual contact is repulsive (masturbation, oral, whatever - frankly if they are that repulsed, it is incomprehensible why they agreed to a sexual relationship). Similarly, while a sexual person has a needs, and an asexual may compromise more, compromising to the point of having to hurt yourself to distract from the pain of sex is plain demented. Even more crazy that I can't understand is that the partner doesn't notice this level of distress and stop.

 

Sorry, NEITHER of your sacrifice examples are right in the sense of a loving, consensual relationship. This is more like Stockholm Syndrome where you develop some fictional sense of love and obligation and sacrifice to preserve it or something. This is plain not right. Either for the ace or the sexual. A partner who doesn't notice the pain of their allegedly loved one is a scamster in my view. Particularly such obvious pain.

 

A compromise can take one out of a comfort zone, perhaps endure the occasional discomfort. I definitely don't see "boredom" as adequate reason to inflict constant denial. But aversion, pain, unqualified rejection... offering/suffering denial in spite of that is plain crazy. How long can anyone keep that up? And WHY should they? To keep a loving partner? Where is the loving partner in this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If my partner wanted frequent sex after seeing me in pain from it, I would assume he gets off on my pain and dump him. Wait. There is no would. I dumped him. My kid's biological father. It isn't that I am not able to sacrifice for love, but I don't see the love in demands for frequent sex which equate to frequent pain for your partner. Period.

 

On the other hand, to spare my ace from having to endure my desire, I was willing to undergo considerable discomfort to try and find partners for an additional poly relationship. That is still on the table, though I'm no longer as anxious about it happening. For a demisexual, there is no attraction to ANY of the many people you discuss having a relationship with till one of them clicks - so far none have. For an asocial person, meaningless repetitive social contact involving small talk and often superficial strangers is exhausting at best and infuriating AND exhausting usually. I had zero hesitation doing it. My ace is worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, anamikanon said:

Sorry, NEITHER of your sacrifice examples are right in the sense of a loving, consensual relationship.

 

It's not 'loving' on both sides of the fence. No sexual person should be forced to put up with the pain of perpetual celibacy, just as no asexual should have to put up with the pain of having to have sex all the time (regardless of whether or not it causes them physical pain), even if they love each other or at least think they do. However, it does happen.. all the time. Tele, for example, often voices how unhappy he is due to being forced to live in celibacy. That's not 'healthy', but we're not dismissing his experience saying it doesn't really count because he's so unhappy and it's mean that his partner won't really even try to meet him halfway. If it only 'counted' when both partners are happy, then we wouldn't really be having this discussion.

 

How come mine and Serran's experiences aren't relevant just because it was rougher for us than it is for some? We were both just trying to say that some asexuals still accept their sexual partner even when the sexual partner doesn't really care about the aces needs at all (because the sexual person will keep having sex with the ace even if the ace doesn't want it but consents because they love their partner, in SOME relationships, not all), ..just as plenty of sexuals here still accept their ace partner even if the ace shows very little care or consideration for the sexual person's sexual and emotional needs. Some asexuals won't even allow their sexual partner to have a convo with them about sexual and intimate issues in the relationship - Yet the sexual still makes the painful sacrifice to be with their ace partner out of love.

 

 

On 3/1/2018 at 10:10 PM, anamikanon said:

A question for asexuals

Would you accept a sexual partner disinterested in cuddling you or mostly refusing and allowing only on their terms?

 

Replace cuddling here by whatever your form of necessary intimacy is. Obviously other than sex.

 

My answer to the question you asked in your OP sparked some controversy that myself and others have been defending ever since, but you didn't specify in the OP that you ONLY wanted answers from people in healthy, happy mixed relationships. I responded based on my own personal experience of making sacrifices and accepting my sexual partner despite him not caring for my needs, and got told ''No, asexuals always have control over the sex'' which is what Tele said when he responded to my reply to your OP. Was I just meant to say ''Okay Tele yes, you're right'' or could I not defend myself and my stance that yes, I have in the past accepted a partner despite his lack of interest in meeting any of my needs. Serran responded also with her personal experience. We were answering the OP. Our experience is still valid because it relates directly to the question posed in your OP :/

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, anamikanon said:

This may even mean initiating an opening of the marriage if any sexual contact is repulsive (masturbation, oral, whatever - frankly if they are that repulsed, it is incomprehensible why they agreed to a sexual relationship). 

I entered into my relationship with my now ex-spouse at 19. I had three previous sexual relationships, which ended for various reasons. I told my now ex-spouse that I had difficulty in maintaining a sexual relationship, cause I tend to get bored after about 6 months. He told me that I just needed a better lover and my issue was a lot of my exes had been virgins. I didn't argue. As far as I knew, no one disliked sex and there had to be a way for me to like it, so maybe that was it. And at first, I wasn't that bothered - it was boring, I didn't feel pleasure people talked about and at times it could be a little painful, but it wasn't that bad. As the years went on though, it became harder to do. As I said, there is an emotional reserve I seem to have for sex. After around 6 months - a year, that reserve gets low. And I want to stop having sex. But, I can't, obviously, cause it is a need for my partner. As I kept pushing myself, over five years, I really couldn't take it anymore. That's when I found AVEN and that some people really aren't into sex. After that, it became how to work with the two different needs. And we tried cutting sex down to like once a week, wasn't enough. Twice a week, wasn't enough. Three times a week, wasn't enough. And any amount was too much for me. We tried scheduling, we tried me initiating, we tried oral more often, he tried (and failed) to up the physical affection without sexual advances (he was incapable of keeping his hands off my breasts/butt/vagina, seriously). 

 

As for "any sexual contact" - my exes all required specific types of sexual contact. My first boyfriend, I allowed manual stimulation, but that wasn't enough, he needed PiV. My second, needed PiV. My third, needed PiV, BDSM and oral - and was very upset that I wouldn't do anal, but I made that a firm no. My fourth, the ex-spouse, needed oral and PIV, he wasn't really into manual at all. I've never been with someone, except my current partner, that didn't have very specific sexual activity needs. It's not as if I could offer a hand job and that was enough. In fact, with my ex-spouse, "sex" meant PiV or oral sex, for 20-40 minutes of straight up non-stop genital stimulation. 

 

And opening up a relationship is not an option for me. I'm monogamous by nature. I tried to play around with the poly/open idea when I was 18 and in college, cause my boyfriend at the time (the third one, into BDSM and all) wanted a four person partner swap sort of arrangement with another couple as his ideal relationship. So, we took things slow - having sex on cam for other people to watch, talking about a crush he had during sex to get him hotter, etc. Even that little bit 100% killed any non-platonic feelings I had for him. Poof, gone, dead. I didn't want to share his bed, I didn't want to kiss him, I didn't want to cuddle, I certainly didn't want sex. I wasn't mad at him... I just ... didn't care anymore. All romantic feelings were dead. This is something that happens with me if there is any interest in other people. And I am incapable of developing feelings for other people when I am in a relationship, so it would be very one-sided opening and end up probably making me feel a bit unbalanced if they have lots of partners and I just have the one, even if I could find out how to maintain romantic feelings through it. 

 

2 minutes ago, anamikanon said:

 

Sorry, NEITHER of your sacrifice examples are right in the sense of a loving, consensual relationship. This is more like Stockholm Syndrome where you develop some fictional sense of love and obligation and sacrifice to preserve it or something. This is plain not right. Either for the ace or the sexual. A partner who doesn't notice the pain of their allegedly loved one is a scamster in my view. Particularly such obvious pain.

Well, I agree one shouldn't have to do something that makes one unhappy. Whether that is the sexual being celibate, or the asexual having sex. If it is causing them significant pain, they shouldn't do it. That's why I won't date "normal" sexuals anymore. And I doubt Pan would, either? But, plenty of sexuals go celibate and discuss depression, suicidal thoughts, etc from sacrificing that need of theirs. And asexuals go through a lot of pain as well. People try to make relationships work, but sometimes they just don't. 

 

I stayed so long cause 1) I didn't know what was "wrong" with me, so I kept trying to "fix" it for five years. 2) I did care about my partner and I blamed myself, cause again, I was looking for a way to "cure" my lack of interest. 3) After finding AVEN, I was trying to find a workable compromise. I tried everything anyone could suggest and nothing worked. It honestly was PiV or oral 4-6 times a week or a miserable, irritable partner. I once compared his moods when he didn't get enough sex to his moods when he'd tried to quit smoking cold turkey. He was that snippy and impossible to be around if he wasn't getting sex enough. He'd also say the cardboard cutouts at work were looking tempting if he had to go like a week without it. 


After deciding there was simply no way to make things work, it took 3 months to get everything set up to actually leave. 

 

To answer the why I entered into it and why I stayed. 

 

But, not all relationships end up being healthy and happy ones. If they did, then there would be far fewer break ups. 

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

 

It's not 'loving' on both sides of the fence. No sexual person should be forced to put up with the pain of perpetual celibacy, just as no asexual should have to put up with the pain of having to have sex all the time (regardless of whether or not it causes them physical pain), even if they love each other or at least think they do. However, it does happen.. all the time. Tele, for example, often voices how unhappy he is due to being forced to live in celibacy. That's not 'healthy', but we're not dismissing his experience saying it doesn't really count because he's so unhappy and it's mean that his partner won't really even try to meet him halfway. If it only 'counted' when both partners are happy, then we wouldn't really be having this discussion.

 

How come mine and Serran's experiences aren't relevant just because it was rougher for us than it is for some? We were both just trying to say that some asexuals still accept their sexual partner even when the sexual partner doesn't really care about the aces needs at all (because the sexual person will keep having sex with the ace even if the ace doesn't want it but consents because they love their partner, in SOME relationships, not all), ..just as plenty of sexuals here still accept their ace partner even if the ace shows very little care or consideration for the sexual person's sexual and emotional needs. Some asexuals won't even allow their sexual partner to have a convo with them about sexual and intimate issues in the relationship - Yet the sexual still makes the painful sacrifice to be with their ace partner out of love.

I don't know how to explain the difference.

 

The question wasn't about happy couples, it was about asexuals who are not averse to sex. Ok, I admit, I may not have made that explicit enough and my view of the world didn't cover a situation where someone can bite themselves to distract from pain as "consensual" but seriously, in my book that gets filed under DO NOT TOUCH UNLESS SHE SEEMS TO ENJOY IT. If my ace harmed himself over sex with me, my desire for sex with him would be dead then and there. No question of frustration. Heck I'd be paranoid and check a hundred times even if I had sex with someone else.

 

Yes Tele has it rough, but the question actually was about trying to understand how aces see and respond to denial of intimacy in their preferred form. "Preferrence is to be free of painful sex that was denied" is.... technically correct, but .... I don't know how to explain this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, anamikanon said:

Sorry, NEITHER of your sacrifice examples are right in the sense of a loving, consensual relationship. This is more like Stockholm Syndrome where you develop some fictional sense of love and obligation and sacrifice to preserve it or something. This is plain not right. Either for the ace or the sexual. A partner who doesn't notice the pain of their allegedly loved one is a scamster in my view. Particularly such obvious pain.

 

10 minutes ago, anamikanon said:

On the other hand, to spare my ace from having to endure my desire, I was willing to undergo considerable discomfort to try and find partners for an additional poly relationship. That is still on the table, though I'm no longer as anxious about it happening. For a demisexual, there is no attraction to ANY of the many people you discuss having a relationship with till one of them clicks - so far none have. For an asocial person, meaningless repetitive social contact involving small talk and often superficial strangers is exhausting at best and infuriating AND exhausting usually. I had zero hesitation doing it. My ace is worth it.

So it's only relevant if you are happy to suffer for the happiness of your own partner?

 

What partner would allow his asocial demisexual girlfriend to go out and risk her personal safety (inlcuding risk of rape, pregnancy, and STIs) and sense of comfort to have casual sex  in order to help him feel validated and loved in the freedom from her desire? How is that any different from me giving my sexual ex sex that I didn't want (but still consented to) in the hopes I could help him feel validated and loved?

 

How are the males* in this situation any different from each other? Both are allowing their female partners to suffer emotionally and put themselves at risk and in a state of physical discomfort, just so they (the males in this example) can feel better about the situation they are in.

 

*(obviously it's not only males who are capable of this, and not only females who can suffer this way, it just happens to be two males partners in this one specific example)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

What partner would allow his asocial demisexual girlfriend to go out and risk her personal safety (inlcuding risk of rape, pregnancy, and STIs) and sense of comfort to have casual sex  in order to help him feel validated and loved in the freedom from her desire? How is that any different from me giving my sexual ex sex that I didn't want (but still consented to) in the hopes I could help him feel validated and loved?

Wait. There is a serious misunderstanding here. I wasn't going out and having casual sex with strangers!!! I was trying to date people to find someone for a second serious relationship!!! There was no sex involved. Nor would there ever be unless that person "clicked" for me. I am not into those levels of martyrdom.

 

He doesn't allow or disallow me my personal choices - "ALLOW?" that idea is totally laughable, but I don't do crazy self harm either. If I chose self harm of that sort, he'd ground me and close the relationship. Nothing against casual sex, but I am not cut out for it and he knows that well too.

 

+

 

It isn't about his "validation" it was about my horniness. Pressuring partner is a trigger for me. Actually, not for him. He just refuses and knows I'll stop and matter ends there. It is because I don't want an unwilling partner.

 

Even if it were casual sex, which it never was, irritation and exhaustion are hardly the same thing as pain! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

The question wasn't about happy couples, it was about asexuals who are not averse to sex. 


 

Ok I'll bite, I'm not averse to sex, but it can be boring, it doesn't quite motivate me the way it motivates ordinary sexual people, I'm in the gray-area with limited sexuality, I can enjoy sex somewhat, under conditions, alright I'm finicky and don't always understand myself, guilty as charged.

 

Lets say I want a room-mate who wants to cuddle.  It is conceivable that over time one or the other of us may not feel quite the same about cuddling.  Is it a deal breaker?  Maybe, maybe not.  Might still be ok room-mates.  It's conceivable someone could go through a period of time when they are not touchy-feely, and forcing it would be more uncomfortable than going-through-the-motions, and not just unsatisfying for that person, it might feel that it's somehow important to the core, that room-mates without the hugs and cuddles is what things must be for the foreseeable future.  Whether something went sour because of the other person or someone just got neurotic and sensitive or put walls up or otherwise got sick or stressed, it is what it is, conditions have changed.  Certain negotiations may or may not be workable for either party.  It can be unpleasant.  Sometimes it doesn't work out well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking people know each other, develop hugs and cuddle expectations, become room-mates, then things don't feel the same, they are just room-mates to one, while the other wants it to be the way it used to be.  Lets say I miss the cuddles a lot, I don't care to be reminded of past cuddles that are no longer available, they've been gone for too long, I wonder if I need a new room-mate, it sucks I may still want that person's cuddles but they are not touchy-feely now, for whatever reason.

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

Lets say I want a room-mate who wants to cuddle. ...  Sometimes it doesn't work out well.

A room-mate is inherently a temporary status for most people. As opposed to sharing a family, kids, home, belongings, and more as a couple. When things don't work out with a room mate, it is merely a premature parting of ways. When things don't work out with a spouse or committed partner, it is a breakdown of the relationship in ways never planned for.

 

If I wanted a room mate who liked sex and my life, child, family, heart and future plans weren't massively entwined, I'd dump him on finding out he was asexual - I am highly sexual, I enjoy sex, he turned out not to. Sorry. No harm, no foul, we go our own ways. I was looking for a sexual roommate. End of story.

 

You don't share investments, childcare, finances, social identity and more with a roommate. You don't plan to grow old with them. Heck, if you have a pet and have to go out of town for a few days, you have to negotiate with most roommates to look after him. Benefits or not. And you do not create or raise children together. If you do, it isn't called "roommates" even if you share the room.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever the expectations were at first, can change and things can become uncomfortable.  Whether that is lives becoming more entangled than most 'just room-mate' situations, or whether it's getting jealous about sharing cuddling benefits -- whatever the expectations are at the beginning, there may be more, less, or different expectations after a period of time, for each person, and they may not be in sync.

 

I could see things starting off as cuddle free-for-all and then someone is feeling more exclusive-partnery about it, while the other partner wants to keep the status-quo, or I could see it starting off as a pair who just cuddle each other, and then one partner starts to spread around the cuddles and the other partner feels neglected or jealous.

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

I've just been back over the most recent three pages of threads in the Friends and Allies section. There are 23 different sexual posters in the last two months explicitly describing how they've compromised with their asexual partners, sometimes with no reciprocation from those partners. Clearly there are plenty of other asexuals who do compromise, some to the point of damaging themselves, and I'm most certainly not framing all sexuals as faultless martyrs. I just wanted to counterbalance the sheer wordcount on this thread from two posters describing the lengths they went to in accommodating their sexual partners.

Well, considering this thread is "a question for asexuals" it makes sense the asexual PoV would be prominent over the sexual one. And we've both talked to asexuals who went through similar, we just happen to both be willing to describe things in detail, while others would prefer to be low key about it. But, there are plenty on both sides that go through compromises that really go too far.. cause the sexuals that come here talking about how they are clinically depressed over their relationship but sticking it out are going too far in the same way me and Pan did to try to please our sexual exes. A compromise really has to reach the balance of both being content, at the least, not one side being miserable and the other content. Or both sides being miserable. Else, it just isn't healthy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2018 at 3:10 AM, anamikanon said:

Would you accept a sexual partner disinterested in cuddling you or mostly refusing and allowing only on their terms?

 

Replace cuddling here by whatever your form of necessary intimacy is. Obviously other than sex.

Hmm so would this mean there would be no cuddling and no sex so no physical contact in any form? Or no cuddling but still having to have sex? Either way, hmmmmm. I would accept them in a strong friendship. It would be very hard for me not to cuddle if I had romantic feelings for them. My need for sensual touch may be as strong as a sexuals need for sex (no way to really measure this though). I would crave cuddles. I think it would be difficult. I don't know. I would maybe say yes as long as I could have other loving relationships too where I could cuddle with others. I'm pretty confident I'm polyamorous even though I haven't explored that kind of relationship yet. I will say if I had to have sex to get my sensual needs fulfilled it could maybe work for both of us. If I'm feeling sensually deprived I'm much more open or willing to have sex just to be physically close to a partner and to touch their skin. Good question. I like what you post on Aven. 

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

Well, considering this thread is "a question for asexuals" it makes sense the asexual PoV would be prominent over the sexual one. And we've both talked to asexuals who went through similar, we just happen to both be willing to describe things in detail, while others would prefer to be low key about it. But, there are plenty on both sides that go through compromises that really go too far.. cause the sexuals that come here talking about how they are clinically depressed over their relationship but sticking it out are going too far in the same way me and Pan did to try to please our sexual exes. A compromise really has to reach the balance of both being content, at the least, not one side being miserable and the other content. Or both sides being miserable. Else, it just isn't healthy. 

I don't know if this helps, since there seems to be a gulf in views on how we see these things, but speaking for myself as a sexual, the two examples of going through unreasonable suffering - are not useful to us, because if we wanted our partners to go through that, we wouldn't even be here.

 

I completely understand the suffering and am frankly indignant on your behalf, but in terms of understanding the asexual perspective in practical terms, they are useless, because I'd chop my arm off before I put my ace through that.

 

In the sense, any sexual coming here and trying to understand is likely trying to understand what is within the realm of possibility to attempt. Which is why we keep losing it over your examples, because frankly, at least to my mind they compute as rape, even though you both say you consented and it was part of the compromise. It may have happened for whatever reasons. From a partner who simply wanted sex at all costs, or because you didn't know about asexuality or because you wanted them to not leave... Regardless, I don't want this sort of compromises in my home and inflicted on any loved one. 

 

It is not that we don't understand your pain. It is that this is not on the table when we are discussing relationships with an ace. We cannot accept this, even if you had to or voluntarily did.

 

I don't want to trigger another war, and I am most certainly not discounting your pain, but this has no place in practical solutions to the problems we have. Which is why we keep parrotting that the queries are about normal relationships or happy relationships or aces who aren't averse, and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2018 at 4:44 AM, Telecaster68 said:

well, tbh, I'm not entirely sure why. No amount of promising and demonstrating that cuddles etc would never lead to any initiation seemed to be enough. So the asexuals are making their own choice to avoid any type of physical affection.

My sexual boyfriend and I have the best cuddle sessions ever and we've come to a place of trust where I know we can just cuddle and it not turn into something else. If it's time for sex he has to attack me in more than a cuddle for me to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GLRDT said:

My sexual boyfriend and I have the best cuddle sessions ever and we've come to a place of trust where I know we can just cuddle and it not turn into something else. If it's time for sex he has to attack me in more than a cuddle for me to know.

Hah. I see your post and raise you this. My ace actually seems to think masturbating me is the same as a backrub and I can ask anytime I want, as often as I like (backrubs are a constant feature of constant cuddles in this relationship). This is called Game, Set, MATCH.

 

(now to see if that works in practice as well....)

 

Getting visions of a sig here. "Blissfully sexed out partner of an ace..." and making everyone jealous.

 

Edit: except your solution actually works, and mine hasn't hit testing phase yet...

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

*unfriends*

Wait for it to work first or you'll miss the chance to say "I told you it isn't that easy..."

 

He's out of town again today though returning for a good while now in a few hours. I am too scared to hope, euphoric, too scared to hope, euphoric, etc. Though if I'm smart, nothing is going to happen today, because he is going to be totally exhausted. BUT HE IS COMING BACK!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2018 at 12:46 PM, Telecaster68 said:

Even accepting all that - which I do, and I've never denied, we still get back to the agency thing. Asexual doesn't want sex - that's what happens, whatever the sexual wants. Sexual wants sex - not going to happen unless the asexual does too.

 

I'm not attaching any blame, or saying the asexual shouldn't have the right to say no. I'm just asking for recognition of how it works instead of putting up chaff about how awful sex can be for an asexual.

 

Yes i feel when you look at it from a moral stance anyone who is saying no to sex is the one who has control in that sense unless they are dating a rapist who has no morals. If a sexual person would like control in the matter they can have conversations with their asexual partner to see how a compromise can be reached and if that doesn't work they have control in the choice to leave. Everyone will always have control of their own decisions sexual or not and everyone will always have control of how they deal with other people's decisions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2018 at 3:24 PM, FictoVore. said:

Stop telling us the sex we had was coerced. We could have CHOSEN to leave (just as you can) but we chose to stay for whatever our own personal reasons were. It's very, very common that an ace gives sex for a long period of time to try to keep their partner happy, even if the sex makes the asexual unhappy (which is most often the case, just as being forced into celibacy will most often make a sexual person unhappy). Many asexuals know their partner will leave if they don't give them sex, but that doesn't mean our sexual partners were/are automatically rapists just because they didn't choose the celibacy route.

I have dated wonderful wonderful kind men who never put any pressure on me for sex. I put the pressure on myself to have it because I thought sex had to be a part of a relationship and that's just how it worked. I didn't realize there  were other options  for being in a relationship. I didn't like sex and it was physically painful but I would do it until I'd ultimately break up with the person because I realized it wasn't something I couldn't do long term. These men were kind and never pressured me. I pressured myself. No coercion on their part at all.

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

 

I don't want to trigger another war, and I am most certainly not discounting your pain, but this has no place in practical solutions to the problems we have. Which is why we keep parrotting that the queries are about normal relationships or happy relationships or aces who aren't averse, and so on.

I'm not averse though, so I was giving the PoV of someone not averse. The aversion came from pushing myself. If I had sex right now, all I'd feel is bored, but it wouldn't be a big deal. However, there are limits and when those limits are pushed, is when aversion sets in. Because sex is a lot more personal than just watching a movie you don't like, or going to a family function you aren't that into. So, someone not averse may be trying to preserve their non-aversion by saying no more often than they say yes. 


You asked why someone not repulsed might say no. I gave the example of what happened when I kept saying yes because I wasn't repulsed. It actually caused repulsion, because it was far too much for me to handle, because sex when I didn't want it takes a significant amount of energy and those reserves are limited. That's why I say no to sex, despite not having repulsion to it. 

 

My stance on sex right now is totally neutral. I could do it. I could probably even enjoy it on some level with my current partner, since I am sexually attracted to them - but I still couldn't handle them needing it from me.  When I first started compromising, I compared it to cleaning the litter box - kind of gross, really boring, but something to do cause I want the thing in my life that requires it. That's kind of where I am now again, cause I've had time to build that emotional reserve back up. The issue is a long-term relationship can take you from that to the other quickly, if you aren't careful about self-care. And saying no when you need to is important self-care. 

 

The only reason we went into more detail is because of responses to the fact the person that doesn't want sex is sometimes in just as bad a place as the sexual not getting it. Not to offer a compromise that works. Obviously a compromise that leaves either side miserable, or both sides miserable, does not work.

 

If you want compromise ideas that work, my suggestion would be lots of discussion with your own partner and figuring out what exactly they are comfortable doing. What takes a lot of energy for them to do so should be done rarely ? What isn't that big a deal? What parts do they enjoy that you can enhance so they have something enjoyable to focus on (some people really like kissing and caresses during, for example, cause that can be a focus)? No one can suggest what will work exactly, cause each compromise is going to be focused around what works for you and your partner.

 

Examples of working compromise strategies I know from lots of discussions with both sexuals and asexuals in mixed relationships that are making it work:

 

  1. Open relationship, if both are open to the idea. 
  2. The ace initiates only - this only works if the ace is comfortable with that, but it releases all pressure of rejection on the sexual and having to worry about initiation on the asexual's part.
  3. Schedules where say, Wednesday is sex day, but all other days are free from sex days. This only tends to work if both sides can keep to it - so the ace has to warn their partner if they aren't up for it that day, rather than wait til the end of the day while their partner is anticipating and then will feel disappointed if they waited all day and nothing happens. And the sexual would have to avoid sex on non-sex days.
  4. A calendar on the wall where the ace can mark the calendar if they feel OK with sex that day, which the sexual can check easily and know if it's OK to initiate. 
  5. Non-verbal signal that is agreed upon where the ace can let their partner know sex will not be turned down if they ask. Some aces aren't comfy saying it, so non-verbal can work better.
  6. On non-sex times, avoid the topic of sex completely, cause even discussion of it can be as tiring for some aces as the act and make it feel like not having a "day off".
  7. Writing down your feelings into a journal for a week, or month, then letting each other read it. That way you can each know how the other is feeling about each other, interactions together and the sex issue in general. It's often easier to do this in a journal than to say it face-to-face. 
  8. Alternatives to sex. Some aces can be into what the sexual can view as sexual, but the ace doesn't feel is very sexual, so is easier for them. Like, BDSM play, kissing while their partner masturbates, toys if they don't have to touch their partner's intimate areas themselves, letting their partner watch them masturbate (if they have a libido) as a way of helping them masturbate themselves (so mutual masturbation). Obviously, the sexual would need to be satisfied with the "less than sex" thing, but some are as long as there is some form of intimacy that is sexual enough for them. 

 

 

Then, there are a few sexuals that are celibate completely and managing to be happy. We have a few members doing that. But, that one is obviously hard and a lot of people won't be able to do it. And, some, even when they do that and prefer that to their ace partner giving sex, have to deal with their ace partner feeling upset at being rejected for sex cause they feel bad not giving it and will start to offer and worry and keep bringing sex up. It's a hard balance to strike no matter what you go with. 

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

Thanks for the acknowledgement - though the asexual still holds the power in to grant or not grant sex in compromise conversations too. What can the sexual grant or not grant? Maybe stop conversation? Emotional support? It gets nasty. 'That's the deal... like or leave' doesn't seem like much of a choice for either person.

Each party in a relationship has the power to say either 'yes' or 'no' to sex, whether sexual, asexual, homosexual, trans,  bi, pan, poly, etc.  You have the same power to turn your partner down for sex, as your partner has to turn YOU down for sex.  So, it really isn't about who has more power than the other.  

 

The 'like it or leave' option is only ONE option.  The sexual can resign him/herself to masturbation.  The couple can open up the relationship for the sexual to get his or her 'needs' met elsewhere.  The couple can agree to participate in non-piv sexual activities.  The sexual can go through some intensive therapy to figure out how to adapt to the lack of sex in the relationship.  The sexual can get a sexbot...

 

The point is, that there are other options besides leaving.  But even leaving is STILL an option (last resort).  Just because the sexual doesn't LIKE the options, doesn't mean there aren't any available.  

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

I'm not averse though, so I was giving the PoV of someone not averse. The aversion came from pushing myself. If I had sex right now, all I'd feel is bored, but it wouldn't be a big deal. However, there are limits and when those limits are pushed, is when aversion sets in. Because sex is a lot more personal than just watching a movie you don't like, or going to a family function you aren't that into. So, someone not averse may be trying to preserve their non-aversion by saying no more often than they say yes. 

Not only is it a lot more personal, but comparing it to going to a family function you don't want to go to, or to a movie you don't like only happens once in a while, whereas, the 'requirement' for sex is usually much more frequent.  Imagine HAVING to go to a family function (such as Sunday dinner) once a WEEK!   So, yes.  Boredom and aversion may come on a lot more quickly than a 'once in a while' thing.   

 

Quote

You asked why someone not repulsed might say no. I gave the example of what happened when I kept saying yes because I wasn't repulsed. It actually caused repulsion, because it was far too much for me to handle, because sex when I didn't want it takes a significant amount of energy and those reserves are limited. That's why I say no to sex, despite not having repulsion to it. 

Perfect!  

 

Quote

My stance on sex right now is totally neutral. I could do it. I could probably even enjoy it on some level with my current partner, since I am sexually attracted to them - but I still couldn't handle them needing it from me.  When I first started compromising, I compared it to cleaning the litter box - kind of gross, really boring, but something to do cause I want the thing in my life that requires it. That's kind of where I am now again, cause I've had time to build that emotional reserve back up. The issue is a long-term relationship can take you from that to the other quickly, if you aren't careful about self-care. And saying no when you need to is important self-care. 

I think @FictoVore. mentioned this, too.  It's the expectation that's the problem.  It's the 'need' that's the problem.  It's the constancy of the expectation and the need that's the problem.  I've mentioned before how my late husband wanted sex several times a day.  Even though I 'complied', I actually got bored after the first few weeks.  For me, there was no time to actually miss it for me.  For him, well, he 'missed' it after only a few  hours.  I truly believe that he was addicted to orgasms and wanted his body to feel that constant state of orgasmic 'bliss'.  

 

I like your list of suggestions and alternatives, Serran.  Goes to show that there are possibilities besides simply leaving.  

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

Each party in a relationship has the power to say either 'yes' or 'no' to sex, whether sexual, asexual, homosexual, trans,  bi, pan, poly, etc.  You have the same power to turn your partner down for sex, as your partner has to turn YOU down for sex.  So, it really isn't about who has more power than the other.  

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread. ~ Anatole France

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chandrakirti said:

That's good to hear @GLRDT, restores faith in humanity after all that recent #metoo stuff.

We were all saying we weren't coerced and chose to have sex out of love for our partners even if it physically hurt us, GLRDT was agreeing that she did the same thing. It was *other people* telling us we were coerced/raped etc. 

 

Though this thread has moved on, maybe it was other people you were referring to with the rather rude #metoo comment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear you @Serranand I get where you are coming from. 

 

The ideas are very useful.

 

I am also sincerely sorry for what you had to go through. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...