Jump to content
ryn2

Another comparison...

Recommended Posts

ryn2
Just now, Telecaster68 said:

So to you, they're saying 'trust is all I care about' and 'not being a racist is all I care about'?

No, to me, they are saying “I care about trust so much that it might as well be all I care about” (and the same for racism).  I look at it that way because, if I breach that person’s trust, none of the other pluses in my column matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
3 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Which bit of 'sex is very important to me' is ambiguous?

HOW important is "very" important? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
1 minute ago, ryn2 said:

It wasn’t ambiguous on its own.  It becomes more so when someone then says “but I’m not breaking up over sex.”

They're (probably) breaking up over the effect lack of sex has on them, maybe feelings of rejection, low self esteem, etc. Those feelings don't need to have been caused by lack of sex (lack of being considered in big decisions could have the same effect, for instance), so to that extent it's not breaking up over sex. Sex just happens to have been behind them, in this particular instance.

 

I can see how it's baffling if lack of sex has no negative effect on you whatsoever though.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

 

5 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Sexuals are not saying 'sex isn't everything'. They're saying it's a dealbreaker, or yes 'sex is very important to me'. Some asexuals are interpreting that as 'never having sex is fine', for some reason.

Not going to play the group generalization / "NO U" game with you.  If you've got your own grievances against asexuals you can go make your own thread for that.

 

All I was initially doing was responding to the OP's scenario, and the OP certainly seemed to indicate that they have run into sexual people claiming that sex isn't everything to them.  So either the OP is lying to us, or you don't actually speak for all sexual people.  I'm leaning toward the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
2 minutes ago, vega57 said:

HOW important is "very" important? 

Important enough that its absence has a seriously negative impact on the rest of life. Like the lack of money would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Just now, Philip027 said:

 

Not going to play the group generalization / "NO U" game with you.  If you've got your own grievances against asexuals you can go make your own thread for that.

 

All I was initially doing was responding to the OP's scenario, and the OP certainly seemed to indicate that they have run into sexual people claiming that sex isn't everything to them.  So either the OP is lying to us, or you don't actually speak for all sexual people.  I'm leaning toward the latter.

So you're removing your strawman. Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
5 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

So if that hadn't been spelled out, and a few years in, you stopped washing or any other kind of hygiene, and your partner said this needed to change for the relationship to continue, that would be a totally unreasonable shocking demand to you?

That would depend on the partner.

 

Also, I do know people (not a small number, given I work in healthcare) who stay with partners whose hygiene is way below what you would consider baseline acceptable and/or who don’t seem to factor that into their choices.

 

People have different preferences, concerns, etc.  Common isn’t the same as universal.

 

Obviously people are free to assume but a number of us are proof of where that can get you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
2 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

That would depend on the partner.

So there are situations in which you would consider being told that regular washing was a dealbreaker was completely unreasonable? (I mean in terms of general slovenliness, as though they'd realise they just found washing far too stressful, not illness/depression etc). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
5 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

All I was initially doing was responding to the OP's scenario, and the OP certainly seemed to indicate that they have run into sexual people claiming that sex isn't everything to them.

This is factually correct.  I have had sexual partners/others tell me “there’s a lot more to a relationship than sex,” and “sex isn’t everything” and then complain that I’m being unfair when I say they’re breaking up with me over sex.

 

I was looking to understand this better, which I now do.  :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yeah, I agree. But asexuals (not all, just frequently) interpret it as being the only dealbreaker, despite sexuals explaining it's one of a bunch of things that are dealbreakers.

Yes, I expect this is because the other "deal breakers" involve things that other people are generally willing to do. Sex is the one place where different people tend to have such wildly different expectations.   Very few people will object to deal breakers like "needs to bath regularly", or "needs to share housework / job".   Sex seems pretty unique in this respect in that some people think it is reasonable to expect sex a few times a week in a romantic relationship, others do not, and both have pretty solid views on the issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
14 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

So you're removing your strawman. Thanks.

No clue what you're talking about, but as far as I'm concerned you're the only one here bringing up an argument unrelated to the topic by trying to air out more of your asexual grievances in someone else's thread.  There's also nothing that I've said that I'm backing out on.

Share this post


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

If someone left you because of your lack of money, I'm willing to bet that you would be confused if they initially told you that "money isn't everything".

I wouldn't find it confusing if they had told me that money was important to them.

 

I think we are getting too hung up on the definition of "isn't everythign".  Clearly that phrase means different things to different people so we should avoid using it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

So there are situations in which you would consider being told that regular washing was a dealbreaker was completely unreasonable? (I mean in terms of general slovenliness, as though they'd realise they just found washing far too stressful, not illness/depression etc). 

I’ve had partners who seemed 100% blind to my appearance at all times, literally asking me if I was ready to go out to dinner as I was rolling out of bed or just stepping out of the shower.  They didn’t seem to notice what clothes I was wearing, whether my clothes were clean, if I had makeup (or even shoes) on, if I had brushed my teeth, if I was stinky from a workout, etc.  Every time I apologized for being gross, they looked puzzled or outright said they hadn’t noticed.

 

If one of those partners had then turned around and said “I’m leaving because of your poor hygiene,” yes, I would be surprised.

 

The rest of my partners?  No.

Share this post


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

HOW important is "very" important? 

In a relationship, "very important" to me means something that makes me so unhappy that I will seriously consider ending the relationship over it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
4 minutes ago, uhtred said:

I wouldn't find it confusing if they had told me that money was important to them.

Of course, because that's much more honest and clear.  At that point, if you're still surprised they'd leave over money issues, that's your own problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
6 minutes ago, uhtred said:

Very few people will object to deal breakers like "needs to bath regularly", or "needs to share housework / job"

“Needs to share housework” is another one rife with disagreement/misunderstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous

Something can be "not everything" and still be vital. My sister was in a brief unhealthy relationship that she ended because she recognized how bad it was, but to this day she'll lament losing 'the best sex she ever had'. But that doesn't mean she regrets leaving or wishes she was still with him, because 'sex isn't everything'. Amazing sex can't always make up for a shitty personality, and an amazing personality can't always make up for shitty (or no) sex. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anisotrophic
2 hours ago, uhtred said:

I think its easy to get caught up in the terminology.  My wife isn't really "asexual" she is something for which there may not be a well defined term.  She has a lot of traits associated with asexuality, in particular a low interest in sex under conditions where the majority of people would be interested. 

You're right. I should quit this.

I try too hard to understand whether my spouse is "really" asexual. The answer is probably "not completely, but it's useful for understanding how he feels and behaves most of the time".

Because I think he does experience attraction, but in a very specific type of circumstance, and not outside that. Nothing weird – and at least it's predictable – we need to be in close physical contact already, in bed at night (or some other "sex-is-okay" situation), and there's some intense emotional connection/vulnerability/bonding event going on. Even in this situation, his approach to intimacy will be very passive; he isn't feeling any particular sexual attraction beyond wanting to be close. If it's not "sexual attraction" then I would call it "a combination of physical arousal and strong romantic feelings". But I think I should stop trying to define it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
max9701
44 minutes ago, Alejandrogynous said:

Something can be "not everything" and still be vital. My sister was in a brief unhealthy relationship that she ended because she recognized how bad it was, but to this day she'll lament losing 'the best sex she ever had'. But that doesn't mean she regrets leaving or wishes she was still with him, because 'sex isn't everything'. Amazing sex can't always make up for a shitty personality, and an amazing personality can't always make up for shitty (or no) sex. 

Well said. 

 

I think the issue here here is the audience. If a sexual says to another sexual "sex isn't everything," it certainly wouldn't imply that sex is unimportant or unnecessary for them. It would be assumed by both that it's still important, simply not the only thing or perhaps the most important thing. Like saying "money isn't everything" - nobody thinks that that phrase means the speaker is 100% okay with being flat broke and living in a shelter all the time.

 

If a sexual were to say that to an asexual, it can easily be misinterpreted, because asexuals probably wouldn't assume that it IS important. To them it might sound like "baseball isn't everything." 

 

Let's chalk this up to people interpreting idiom differently because they have different backgrounds. It's not lying or hypocrisy. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SusannaC

Agreed!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
8 minutes ago, max9701 said:

I think the issue here here is the audience. If a sexual says to another sexual "sex isn't everything," it certainly wouldn't imply that sex is unimportant or unnecessary for them. It would be assumed by both that it's still important, simply not the only thing or perhaps the most important thing. Like saying "money isn't everything" - nobody thinks that that phrase means the speaker is 100% okay with being flat broke and living in a shelter all the time.

 

If a sexual were to say that to an asexual, it can easily be misinterpreted, because asexuals probably wouldn't assume that it IS important. To them it might sound like "baseball isn't everything." 

Good point, and yes.  To me it would be like being told “baseball isn’t everything” and then getting dumped over baseball.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrDane
On 6/11/2018 at 11:24 PM, vega57 said:

What is it about sex that causes you to feel this way?  

 

What you described here almost sounds a bit...self-centered.  I don't mean that in a 'mean' way, but it seems that there's a point when sex becomes (if not already), all about how *you* feel.  I mean, does your wife transcend into a cosmic frame, yadda, yadda, yadda?  Are HER batteries charged?  Does SHE believe in herself and feel like she's 'worth something'?  Does it clear HER mind of stress and worries?  

 

It seems while the two of you may be sharing bodies, you're definitely not on the same page mentally or emotionally.  

 

Yet, you'll continue to have sex...*scratches head*

I love her and I do help her charge her batteries and relieve her of stress (yadda-yadda-yadda...) but not through sex. I do many things where I put her in center and she does things where she centers herself. Sex is for my sake (self-centered).  She can enjoy it. Never needs it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...