Is more common for an Ace to refer to sex in a derogatory fashion?

[Telecaster68]

But if you feel sex is an important part of a relationship to you then you'll feel positive about it. You only feel negative about it - or even neutral - if you don't think it's important. 

[Lara Black]

8 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

But if you feel sex is an important part of a relationship to you then you'll feel positive about it. You only feel negative about it - or even neutral - if you don't think it's important. 

It’s like you missed the first part of my post when quoting the second.

Sexuals can have different attitudes towards sex. Even if it’s absolutely essential for their emotional well-being, many people separate themselves from the process emotionally, need to make it dirty or aggressive. To quote Fifty Shades of Grey, “I don’t make love – I f**k”.

[ryn2]

15 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

But if you feel sex is an important part of a relationship to you then you'll feel positive about it. You only feel negative about it - or even neutral - if you don't think it's important. 

I’m not sure that’s true.  Plenty of people talk negatively about things they do regularly, whereas others talk positively about things they never do.  That’s not even counting people who may be in favor of the narrow range of activities in which they think others “should” engage but then turn around and disparage (e.g., and TMI) gay sex, oral, anal, and/or anything else they personally don’t like.

[InariYana]

18 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

But if you feel sex is an important part of a relationship to you then you'll feel positive about it. You only feel negative about it - or even neutral - if you don't think it's important. 

There are people who think sex is important in their relationships but they may not be able to satisfy their partners or they lost attraction towards their partners (these things happen often) and they dread having sex because they will feel even more inadequate or guilty (for not wanting their partner anymore)... so they don't exactly feel positive about it.   

[Telecaster68]

They can, but by definition, they all share the desire to have sex, so they don't feel negative or neutral about it. Asexuals on the other hand don't particularly won't sex or definitely don't want it, so clearly, by definition, they share the attitude of being negative or neutral. So to that extent, attitudes can be shaped round the asexual/sexual divide. 

[Telecaster68]

Okay. 

 

You're right. 

 

Sexuals are no more likely to think positively about sex than asexuals.

 

I'll add that to my 'mad shit only found on AVEN' list. 

[Guest]

On 5/10/2018 at 4:12 PM, Telecaster68 said:

What are some examples of people constantly telling you to have sex? 

Eh. I mean, I get why people feel they are constantly told that.  

 

When I was 14 and started talking to peers, sex came up as a topic. People talked about masturbation so I made the mistake of answering honestly that I don't do it. Cue links and advice on how to start, told everyone does it, if I don't then I am just a liar that doesn't wanna admit it, etc. When I was 15 and said I didn't look at porn, I was told to try it cause "everyone likes it". When I had sex and mentioned it was rather meh and I didn't get the point, got told to just keep trying and trying, everyone likes sex, if you want a relationship you have to learn how you like it, no guy is gonna stay with you if you don't do it and do it often, you'll just get cheated on, do it even if you don't want it, etc. At 25, I finally stopped listening to everyone else. 

 

But... honestly, even now, I mentioned my partner and I haven't had intercourse yet when people were teasing me about getting pregnant and I basically got pressured into doing it (people I work with think I am marrying a man, since they are homophobic, not gonna correct them), told "his nature will come out" if I don't offer it up (what does that even mean? he'll take it?) and all the other things and I consistently get teased about not putting out (note: these people are all older than me, 33-65). But, I'm old enough now to not listen to them and I know myself well enough to not let it pressure me and thankfully my partner has no interest in traditional sex, so it's not even a thing we want to do. 

 

Either I have to lie during such conversations, constantly dodge talking in them, or put up with pressure/teasing/ "advice" about how I'm going to be forever lonely or cheated on forever for not "doing the nasty".And I'm actually sexually active with my partner, even if not in the traditional sense. But, I do get tired of constantly going along with conversations about how I'll be walking bowlegged after a visit and stuff (ack, why would I want to be that sore even if I did have sex?), acting like I am having lots of PiV sex, cause it's just not true and I get tired of acting all the time... I already have to act with most everyone because no one can know I'm going to have a wife, not a husband, I'm not gonna act the part of the very sexual person on top of it all the time too. 

 

And if I still feel pressure to be more sexual, despite being sexually active and sexually attracted to my partner, because I'm not "sexual enough" for other people... imagine how someone who has no interest in, or is even repulsed by, sex being put in the same situation? And someone younger, rather than a 31 year old that has lots of experience with relationships and a supportive partner that also isn't "sexual enough" for a lot of people? 

[Lara Black]

16 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Okay. 

 

You're right. 

 

Sexuals are no more likely to think positively about sex than asexuals.

 

I'll add that to my 'mad shit only found on AVEN' list. 

Tele, we all know your attitude towards the importance of sex for sexuals. But please don’t twist my responses. Or other people’s, for that matter. Why do you need to get that way? It’s far from the first disagreement when you go ahead and blow opponents’ statements way out of proportion and call them ridiculous. What for?

[Telecaster68]

Which bit am I misrepresenting? 

[Lara Black]

12 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Which bit am I misrepresenting? 

“I’d say it’s not about (a)sexuality – it’s about one’s attitude towards sex. And those two aren’t directly connected” is pretty far from “Sexuals are no more likely to think positively about sex than asexuals”. In fact, the second would be a good case of blowing the first out of proportion for argument's sake.

[ryn2]

30 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

They can, but by definition, they all share the desire to have sex, so they don't feel negative or neutral about it. Asexuals on the other hand don't particularly won't sex or definitely don't want it, so clearly, by definition, they share the attitude of being negative or neutral. So to that extent, attitudes can be shaped round the asexual/sexual divide. 

I don’t think not wanting something personally always equates to feeling or talking negatively about it, or vice versa.

 

Also, there are plenty of biased folks out there who are very (outspokenly) against sex that doesn’t conform to their narrow definitions of what’s acceptable.

 

Per capita, are there more generally-sex-repulsed aces than sexuals?  It makes sense there would be.  But that’s not what was under discussion.

[Telecaster68]

So now your assumption is that both sexuals and asexuals are likely saying something they don't mean? Because that's the implication. 

[InariYana]

21 minutes ago, Serran said:

 

 

And if I still feel pressure to be more sexual, despite being sexually active and sexually attracted to my partner, because I'm not "sexual enough" for other people... imagine how someone who has no interest in, or is even repulsed by, sex being put in the same situation? And someone younger, rather than a 31 year old that has lots of experience with relationships and a supportive partner that also isn't "sexual enough" for a lot of people? 

Exactly! Why all those pushy attitudes when not having sex/not having it often or being repulsed by it is not hurting anyone (not talking about mixed ace/allo relationships here).

Why do people feel the need to tell me that being paired up is surely, definitely better than being single (tell that to all domestic violence victims), then - if newly paired up - that I should be having plenty of sex, later on "why don't you marry", then "biological clock is ticking"... or that me not having much sex is "awww, such a shame, what a waste". Seriously. Get outta my pants and private life choices! 

 

Honestly, me NOT having wild, enthusiastic sex is not going to cause harm to anyone. It's not going to endanger my health. Surely it won't get me into trouble of an unwanted pregnancy. All peachy and safe, bliss. So why the need to make me feel somehow inadequate or "not fully human" if I don't want to engage in things many others want, but I don't care about? I know that there are sexual people with more of a 'meh' attitude towards sex and maybe they are simply reluctant to share this with anyone, because... they won't exactly hear "that's fine, cool, not your thing, I understand". 

 

I'm not walking the streets pushing people towards eating bread, for example. Imagine that: "What? Are you not a fan of bread? What's wrong with you, everyone loves bread! Maybe try it with garlic butter on... two slices at a time? *wink wink* Pfff, that's... boring, not eating bread. You must lead a very boring life."  

Why can't it be:

A: "I don't like bread and I won't have it, no thanks." B: "OK, fine, cool."

A: "I don't like sex and I won't have it, no thanks." B: "OK, fine, cool." 

That would be great, really.       

    

[ryn2]

1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

So now your assumption is that both sexuals and asexuals are likely saying something they don't mean? Because that's the implication. 

How so?  I have a positive opinion and speak positively of many things that aren’t necessarily my personal cup of tea.  E.g ., dogs.  I personally prefer cats and don’t have any interest in having a dog.  I would probably not live with someone who has a dog.  I like dogs in the abstract, though.  I say (and mean) nice things about dogs, support my friends who like/have dogs, express (and feel) sadness for people who lose their dogs, squee over pictures of people’s dogs, etc.  I’m a “cat person” through and through but not a dog hater.

[James121]

21 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Many sexual partners on AVEN bitch about NOT having sex all the time. They talk about the negative effects not having sex has on them, and often speak about not having sex like that's a really bad thing. Asexuals are merely doing the exact same thing but from the other side of the fence. And discussing negative feelings about sexual experiences is a big part of helping people come to terms with their asexuality. What more can one expect from people on a website about asexuality which is designed for asexual people?

Read the bit that you quoted me on. It’s says people should talk about these things exclusively with people who are on board with that idea. Where have I suggested that you can’t do that on Aven?

And as for bitching, aven is riddled with it.

[James121]

On 5/11/2018 at 10:43 PM, AjAylien said:

I actually find your statement offensive and prejudice. 

May I ask why? What I wrote was not offensive nor predjudice.

 

On 5/11/2018 at 11:28 PM, ryn2 said:

It’s probably more fair/accurate to say sex (or having sex) can be normal and healthy...

I would be more inclined to say that....

”on the whole having sex is perfectly normal and healthy”

 

using “can be” gives the impression that it’s a 50/50 and I don’t feel that that is accurate at all.

[Sally]

6 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

I think there is a necessary connection. Asexuals just don't see sex as integral to a relationship. Sexuals do. To that extent, they're directly connected. 

Asexuals see sex as integral to a relationship for  sexuals.   The way you say it makes asexuals  sound as though they have no knowledge of anyone but themselves.   What would be very nice is for sexuals to come to understand that sex is not integral to a relationship for asexuals.  Then we would have at least a rudimentary understanding of each other.  

[James121]

On 5/11/2018 at 4:06 PM, SparkyCat13 said:

Well your attitude is very much coming off as "this doesn't matter to me, so it shouldn't matter at all" and thinking that people can't be hurt by this stuff, or that it's not important that they are, just because you aren't. You seem to be completely shutting down everyone else's perspectives on this, that they can't be right just because it doesn't jive with what you personally feel. Which is extremely egocentric. So if that's not actually how you feel then you should think about how your words come across and explain yourself better.

Ok, (I’ll try and explain it). Some people identify within groups, or as someone particular, or as having certain traits, personalities or even peculiarities not because that’s who they are that person but because its trendy to be different, makes them interesting as a person and therefore more quirky and/or because they are incapable or fell incapable of being what society considers cool, trendy or normal.

 

Hopefully that makes some sense.

[SparkyCat13]

1 hour ago, James121 said:

Ok, (I’ll try and explain it). Some people identify within groups, or as someone particular, or as having certain traits, personalities or even peculiarities not because that’s who they are that person but because its trendy to be different, makes them interesting as a person and therefore more quirky and/or because they are incapable or fell incapable of being what society considers cool, trendy or normal.

 

Hopefully that makes some sense.

Okay, yes, that does make sense, and I agree with that. But I think we're somewhat missing each other here.

 

Yes, there are people out there who think it's cool to rebel against their parents/the man and feel a sense of superiority over the "sheeple" (ugh, that term makes me feel like vomiting) who just do what's expected of them. And since there are people like that within every group, yeah, I'm sure there are aces who hate on sex for that reason. Statistically, there has to be. Especially among teenagers.

 

The point I and some other posters are trying to make is that it's very likely most aces who have negative attitudes towards sex might feel that way because of all the pressuring we face every day from society (e.g. pestering from concerned parents/friends, the endless "you just haven't found the right person" or "it's not a proper relationship without sex," and sometimes corrective rape does happen).

 

Any analogy is going to be lacking in some way, but I'm going to try. Say you don't really care about carrots. You don't hate them or even dislike them, and you may even eat them if they're given to you, and even think "these carrots are pretty good," but you're never going to think "man, I really want to eat carrots." But you live in a community that places carrots on a high pedestal and constantly tells you how great carrots are, how normal and healthy they are, how absolutely delicious they are, and that it's weird that you don't actively want to eat carrots. Your parents or friends are constantly trying to incorporate carrots into your everyday life, thinking that some form of carrots will finally open you up to the idea that carrots are freaking amazing. The fact that you don't mind eating carrots isn't enough. You have to LOVE them. You'd get pretty darn annoyed by the concept of carrots after several years of this. You'd probably still not even dislike carrots, but you eventually feel like "EVERYONE STOP TALKING ABOUT CARROTS; THEY'RE NOT THAT GREAT," and then people respond, "oh my gosh, how can you hate carrots? What's wrong with you?" (with some thrown in comments of "we don't ONLY talk about carrots; get over yourself.") And then the arguments just escalate from there because human beings are really bad about digging in their heels on things when feeling attacked.

 

Or for something more relatable, maybe take Game of Thrones? A good number of the fans seem to be obsessive, frothing at the mouth over it. My one roommate really doesn't like things that are overly popular and gets turned off from checking them out if she's inundated with the world freaking out about how awesome it is, so even though she has some interest in the series, she still hasn't really wanted to watch it. I, on the other hand, really don't like dark stories with a lot of death in them or anything with annoying relationship drama (and, obviously, I'm not interested in all the sex), so I have no interest in Game of Thrones due to its content. And you know what? For the most part in my life, I don't even think about Game of Thrones and it doesn't bother me. We can coexist just fine. But then it comes up in trivia games, and in internet articles and think pieces, and sometimes conversations with friends where I feel a bit left out, and it just crops up everywhere (because most people watch it and can understand the references, so it's an easy thing to use, and I understand that), and it makes me feel like, "GOD guys, ENOUGH with Game of Thrones already!!" But that doesn't mean that I'm hating on it because of a need to rebel against society. I've just been rubbed a bit raw by it.

 

Also note that I personally have not been pestered by anyone to watch Game of Thrones. I haven't even been personally told that I'm weird for not liking or watching it. But I still feel that pressure and that irritation purely because of the saturation.

 

Does that make sense?

[ryn2]

2 hours ago, James121 said:

May I ask why? What I wrote was not offensive nor predjudice.

 

I would be more inclined to say that....

”on the whole having sex is perfectly normal and healthy”

 

using “can be” gives the impression that it’s a 50/50 and I don’t feel that that is accurate at all.

“Can be” only gives the impression that it’s not guaranteed.  There is no percentage implied.

[iff]

7 hours ago, James121 said:

Ok, (I’ll try and explain it). Some people identify within groups, or as someone particular, or as having certain traits, personalities or even peculiarities not because that’s who they are that person but because its trendy to be different, makes them interesting as a person and therefore more quirky and/or because they are incapable or fell incapable of being what society considers cool, trendy or normal.

 

Hopefully that makes some sense.

But then again on the reverse, couldn't someone identify as sexual for the same reason, because they feel it is what is expected of them due to peer pressure and societal expectations.

[InariYana]

7 hours ago, James121 said:

May I ask why? What I wrote was not offensive nor predjudice.

 

I would be more inclined to say that....

”on the whole having sex is perfectly normal and healthy”

 

using “can be” gives the impression that it’s a 50/50 and I don’t feel that that is accurate at all.

On the whole not having sex is perfectly normal and healthy too. Plus, it's zero risk - you won't catch an STI, no risk of unwanted pregnancy, no need to worry about contraception, no risk of your casual partner deciding thy're going to take advantage and do something you don't want to do...

Sex can be very risky. People's uncontrolled desire for sex built criminal empires based on human trafficking for sex and unimaginable suffering.

It's not all good, it's not all bad. I'd say closer to 70 good/ 30 bad mark. 

Sexual drive in humans can lead to pretty messed up situations and even crime.

No sexual interest/drive - well, you just don't participate, that's all.   

[Telecaster68]

Here's the Oxford English Dictionary definition of normal:

 

Quote

 

1.  Conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected. EG

‘it's quite normal for puppies to bolt their food’

 

1.1 (of a person) free from physical or mental disorders.‘

'until her accident Louise had been a perfectly normal little girl’‘

'many previously normal people exhibit psychotic symptoms after a few nights without sleep’

 

I know AVEN collectively has a political problem with the first of those definitions, but it is simply the case that asexuality isn't normal in those terms - its not usual, typical or expected - and that's the everyday meaning that is mostly used. That doesn't mean asexuality is somehow shameful or wrong.

 

But continually trying to insist that the attitudes that come with asexuality aren't edge cases and being asexual doesn't have a general effect on other sexual attitudes (like a tendency to think and therefore speak positively about sex) or that it's never related to other characteristics of how someone relates to others is ludicrous, both logically and from observation of the 100,000 members of AVEN. 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, James121 said:

Read the bit that you quoted me on. It’s says people should talk about these things exclusively with people who are on board with that idea. Where have I suggested that you can’t do that on Aven?

And as for bitching, aven is riddled with it.

Read the OP smarty pants Mary is talking specifically about asexuals posting negative opinions of sex on AVEN which is one of the only places they can safely express their opinions.  Everyone else commenting in the thread at the time of your comment (as far as i can tell) were also referring to posts on AVEN. You don't see many asexuals going around  offline telling sexual people how awful sex is because they know they're going to be ganged up on and mocked and ridiculed for their sex negativity. So your comment was either totally irrelevant (if you were referring to asexuals discussing having a  negative opinion about sex off AVEN) or completely ridiculous if you were actually trying to say they shouldn't be allowed to voice their opinions on AVEN unless everyone else in the thread agrees with them (and are now trying to change it to make it sound like you meant something different).

 

I personally believe that if you have strong negative views about sex you should either discuss them exclusively with someone who feels the same or not at all. 

 

And again, to flip your comment around - you're saying that sexuals also should only be allowed to discuss the pains of celibacy among themselves. No more input into threads where asexuals are discussing how much they hate having to compromise by having sex with their sexual partner or how they wish sex didn't exist because that would make their lives so much easier!

[daveb]

5 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I know AVEN collectively has a political problem with the first of those definitions

I tend to disagree with that assessment. I think if there is a collective AVEN viewpoint/dispute it's more with the second definition you list. That being asexual is abnormal in the sense of having physical and/or mental disorders. But that's my opinion as an asexual. I don't have any numbers or other hard data to back it up. Maybe that's just my bias because that's how I feel about the use of the word normal in this case. Being sexual and all that that entails is normal; being asexual is also normal. Depending on the definition of normal in each case. 🙂

[Telecaster68]

You mean there's a dispute over whether asexuality is not normal in the sense of being a mental disorder? My perception is that AVEN is both officially and unofficially pretty united that it's not. By that usage, asexuality is normal. 

 

But that definition gets elided with asexuality being standard/typical/expected, so that anything that implies asexuals might tend to be different from sexuals as a correlation with asexuality edges on unsayable on AVEN*. The logic of that is how we get to claims that sexuals are just as likely to talk negatively about sex as asexuals, which is clearly implausible.

 

* unless you're asexual. If you're asexual you can extrapolate from N=1 to your heart's content. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Here's the Oxford English Dictionary definition of normal:

 

I know AVEN collectively has a political problem with the first of those definitions, but it is simply the case that asexuality isn't normal in those terms - its not usual, typical or expected - and that's the everyday meaning that is mostly used. That doesn't mean asexuality is somehow shameful or wrong.

 

But continually trying to insist that the attitudes that come with asexuality aren't edge cases and being asexual doesn't have a general effect on other sexual attitudes (like a tendency to think and therefore speak positively about sex) or that it's never related to other characteristics of how someone relates to others is ludicrous, both logically and from observation of the 100,000 members of AVEN. 

I don't really get what you're saying here Tele (if your comment was in response to Yana). All that's being said is that in some cases not having sex is perfectly fine and healthy even for a sexual person. And yes there are certainly cases outside of asexuality where not having sex is relatively 'normal'. Not every person alive is having sex 24/7 😛

 

I don't think anyone is trying to argue that asexuality itself is totally normal though (we all know it's very uncommon!). Negative views towards sex however are relatively common even among sexual people and those views can have a lot of negative effects on the people who hold those attitudes and those they come in contact with intimately but that's a bit of a different topic. I'm just saying it's not only aces who hold negative views towards sex and certainly not all of them do: some are very positive about it they just don't want to have it personally. Then there are sexuals (even hypersexuals) who love having sex but see it as something dirty and low to be used as a form of aggression and control, or see it as something shameful and feel deeply depressed and humiliated after having it. Having worked in a brothel for two years (having to have sex with up to 8 different people every night) I can tell you these are relatively common attitudes that some people hold. (Though yes of course a higher percentage of asexuals hold negative views towards sex for obvious  reasons).

[daveb]

10 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

You mean there's a dispute over whether asexuality is not normal in the sense of being a mental disorder? My perception is that AVEN is both officially and unofficially pretty united that it's not. By that usage, asexuality is normal. 

 

But that definition gets elided with asexuality being standard/typical/expected, so that anything that implies asexuals might tend to be different from sexuals as a correlation with asexuality edges on unsayable on AVEN*. The logic of that is how we get to claims that sexuals are just as likely to talk negatively about sex as asexuals, which is clearly implausible.

 

* unless you're asexual. If you're asexual you can extrapolate from N=1 to your heart's content. 

That's not what I said. I feel like some of us are talking a different language from you.

[Telecaster68]

I'm saying it's illogical to expect negative views to be as common among sexuals as among asexuals. 

 

An analogy: gay and straight men would be equally likely to talk negatively about gay sex. Does that seem credible to you? 

[Telecaster68]

3 minutes ago, daveb said:

That's not what I said. I feel like some of us are talking a different language from you.

So do I. Can you explain what you were trying to say some more?