asexual? sexual sex averse? what?

[ryn2]

3 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

On the other hand, is it certainly only personal and not cultural? Perhaps at least some part of their distress comes from sociocultural norms which expect people to "be sexual", to desire sex, to have an active sex life, so some people who cannot meet this standard and yet don't feel able to actively reject it may feel like they have "failed", or may feel some form of internal guilt for their feelings.

That could have been a factor as well, I’m sure.

[everywhere and nowhere]

I decided to come back to the topic because I thought of something. It may sound a little paradoxical because I, actually, don't believe in any absolute, unambigous boundary between "asexual" and "allosexual" - perhaps because for me there is no "asexuality as such", there are only NEVER-IDENTICAL thoughtfeelings of different people who find the concept of asexuality useful for exaplaining their feelings. So, logically, I probably "should" also distrust simple "check" questions... But just like the question "Would you be happy if you were never to have sex ("again" if applicable)?" is sometimes proposed as the one most predictive of asexuality, I thought that maybe there is also such a question which could make distinguishing between sex-averse allosexuals and aces easier. Absolutely not foolproof, but I think that it could be helpful: "If you were practically able to solve this problem, would you prefer not to be sex-averse?". It could use some refinment, I think... But anyway, I strongly feel that I wouldn't like to be non-sex-averse, to be able to desire sex - and I strongly suspect that these feelings could be different for some people and that this may be what, statistically, sets most ex-averse aces and sex-averse allosexuals apart.

[Paprika]

On 9/25/2018 at 7:26 AM, Nowhere Girl said:

To be honest, I feel exactly like that. For me sex aversion precedes asexuality. But I feel that precisely that makes me "at least effectively asexual": I'm scared and repulsed by the idea of personally having sex, so I feel unable to experience sexual desire.

Which, again, begs the question: is sexual attraction possible without sexual desire? Or is it rather a form of esthetic attraction? Recently I even created a topic about this very issue:

I would say that what I'm able to feel is more than esthetic attraction. It definitely has a sexual component, it can, for example, make me want to have third-person fantasies including the person I'm "sexually attracted" to. But I still never desire actually having sex with anyone. Perhaps I experience some kind of potential sexual desire which is still unable to overcome all my sex aversion and nudity aversion. Just please, respect my choices - but I know that on this forum one can admit to "weird" feelings and still find respect. Even if it's a form of health-related sexual repression (because my nudity aversion stems from being chronically ill), I don't want to "unbridle my sexuality", I WANT to remain sex-averse, effectively asexual and celibate. My sex aversion is strong enough that the very idea of not being sex-averse - of being able to desire sex and potentially sexually available - feels offensive by itself.

Also remember that supposedly overcoming aversion isn't so simple. For example, having an acceptably-looking body would require keeping my allergy in check - and all methods tried before have been unsuccesful. Probably if it's obtainable at all, it would require such an extremely restrictive diet that my quality of life would drop to almost zero. How could anyone say that I'm supposed to torment myself like that, to rob myself of almost all food-related pleasure, in order to gain access to something I have absolutely no guarantee of enjoying? Even if I had a good-looking body, I don't think that I even could become nudity-indifferent after having been intensely nudity-averse all my life. So it's a change I don't even want to attempt.

I don't think that I was born asexual, but I still feel that I can find acceptance and understanding only in the asexual community. Probably my inborn tendency is bisexual (or, maybe better, polysexual - because I'm for example not at all attracted to "manly men", but I find androgynous people esthetically very attractive) - combined with a clear emotional preference for women, which would make engaging in heterosexual sex unlikely (because I couldn't accept sex without a relationship which is at least a close friendship). Yet all this potential was cancelled very early (long before puberty) by my chronic illness and developing nudity aversion. I don't experience it as any tragic loss, I experience it as a path I prefer. By "losing" sex I "won" access to a philosophical realm which is mostly inaccessible to people who are unable to question the supposedly universal character of sexual attraction and sexual desire.

I may not have "the best of both worlds", but I'm close to that: I feel that I can theoretically understand sexual intimacy, it's present between people I fantasise about - but I can stay comfortably away from experiencing it myself.

 

So, going back to the more general question: I tend to think that it's possible to experience sexual attraction and sex aversion simultaneously only if sexual attraction can be separated from sexual desire. Yet, if asexuality can be defined as "not experiencing sexual desire", "not wanting to have sex" (and a lot of aces feel that exactly such feelings make them asexual), it would logically make supposed "sex-averse allosexuals" effectively asexual. However, I want to respect other people's labels. Some prefer to call themselves "sex-averse sexuals", others "gray-a" or maybe just "celibate". I may be a representative of this group as well, but my own preference is to identify as asexual, or, more precisely, "at least effectively asexual". It also partially determines my other choices and preferences: to experience my identification as sex-averse and sexually unavailable more important than my identification as asexual (because for me sex aversion is the cause and asexuality the effect, not the other way around - even if there are also a lot of aces who feel that for them asexuality is the cause and sex aversion the effect) and also to experience asexual visibility as secondary to another goal - to make nonsexual lifestyles and lack of sexual desire something socioculturally acceptable, regardless of what labels people may know and choose.

You are not alone! I agree with and feel the same ways! I may have endometriosis and I already know orgasms cause me pain, so when talking about illness being a factor, I agree with all that you mentioned regarding that too. I am glad someone was able to effectively explain this... at least it makes sense to me. 💟 I feel heard and understood. Like, having an illness that gets in the way of physically enjoyable sex is not seen as a loss in my eyes when there is so much perspective to gain from experiencing something different than most people. I have been grateful for this opportunity to express how life can still be enjoyable and wonderful without sex. In my mind and heart I have always felt sex was strange, though, so the only difference is that I don't want to or really can't have sex unless I want to be in pain for days. It's opened my eyes and heart yo different ways of living such as what Buddhits and Hindus believe in. None of those beliefs seem ridiculous as they might have had I known about these beliefs before I became involuntarily celibate. Why be sad and upset for the rest of my life when I can just adopt beliefs that can carry the weight of what I live with for me and beliefs that comfort me when others don't understand? 

[Guest]

So tagging on to this question, is sex-averse the same or similar to sex negative? 

 

If so does that apply to me because the thought of sex intimidates me but I also felt uninterested or confused and uncomfortable when I tried it with my previous partner, I was all very intimidated and grossed out by his penis. Would that mean I am sex repulsed or sex negative?

 

There are so many acronyms I'm just trying to figure out which of them apply to me or if Asexual will cover everything under one acronym umbrella

[everywhere and nowhere]

42 minutes ago, AJ 0688 said:

So tagging on to this question, is sex-averse the same or similar to sex negative? 

No. Sex-negative is not a sentiment, but a political position, the opposite of sex-positive. Basically, it's an assumption that sex, overall, does more harm than good.

I would rather describe myself as sex-neutral in this respect, because I don't believe that "sex as such" has any inherent value, it can only be judged as "good" or "bad" in an individual context. Yet, on the other hand... I have a rather pessimistic view about the "quality" of sex people are having - in the sense that a lot of sex people have doesn't meet the criterion of being fully freely wanted, free of any coercion. I also have to admit that, given the popularity of sex positivity and the amount of pressure to declare oneself as sex-positive (also within the asexual community, to show that "aces aren't antisexual!" - and yet "sex-negative" also isn't the same as "antisexual", it can be perceived as an appeal for change, a kind of road map of what should change in interpersonal relations if sex is to become "something which does more good than harm") - I appreciate the rebellious aspect of sex negativity, similar to Jillian Horowitz in a text which, unfortunately, seems to no longer be online:

Quote

I call myself sex-negative partially because it's an unsettling term - one that invokes particular histories that many feminists would rather paper over or erase completely - and partially because I fundamentally disagree with the assumptions about sex, kink, and consent upon which mainstream sex-positive feminism is based.

Sex-negativity makes a lot of feminists uncomfortable, but I frankly couldn't give less of a damn if my politics hurt your feelings.

"Sex-positive" and "sex-negative" are political terms and shouldn't be used as a measurement of willingness to have sex. It's even more important among aces because in this group it can differ a lot - for example, a person may be (personally) sex-averse and (politically) sex-positive at the same time.

There is also a differentiation between "sex-averse" and "sex-repulsed", but the difference is not universally accepted. The first version I have seen - and therefore I cling to this one - explains it like that: sex repulsion is generalised, it includes feeling uncomfortable with sexual content not related to oneself. A sex-repulsed person is also likely to, for example, be severely grossed out by porn, uncomfortable with conversations on sexual issues... In contrast, for a sex-averse person negative feelings of disgust, anxiety, discomfort etc. are limited to the possibility of personally having sex, such a person is typically indifferent to sex not involving themself. That's me - I have fortunately never had or tried sex, but I know that the idea of doing it feels deeply frightening to me. However, I don't mind other people's sex, I can have third-person fantasies without feeling disgusted... But I very much dislike the assumption that sex aversion is something milder than sex repulsion, that if I declare myself "only" sex-averse and not sex-repulsed, than maybe I'm not completely psychologically incapable of having sex... No, for me the difference between sex-averse and sex-repulsed is not a matter of intensity, but rather extent.

So if you want to decide whether you are sex-averse or sex-repulsed, consider how you feel about other people's sex, sexual conversations, sexual content... Also, while sex aversion and sex negativity are two different things, one may be sex-negative in addition to being sex-averse. Consider what is your opinion on the value of sex to decide what feels closest to you: sex-positive, sex-neutral, sex-negative...

 

And by the way, to all admins: create a definition debate subforum, please! 🤩

[Guest]

Thank you for explaining. I know it must be a pain to explain to people what certain things mean. I only know I'm Asexual and with so many acronyms you kind of feel pressure to figure out your own. Not to mention most web forums can be so darn clichey

[gisiebob]

I like the terminology of "isosceles triangle"  because it's kinda terrible. I didn't spell it right (thank you computer), and I didn't expect myself to.

so taking this word that I can't spell, what it says is "triangle with two equal sides" (thanks again computer) when we give things names, its usually in the name of efficiency and...we're trading a word many of us last heard in high school that we can't spell for the difference of like...half the characters and words? is that in any way useful?

 

as far as I see it, as long as someone who is using that word is willing to sort out the nitty gritty of what it means, the only question of usefulness I have was that last question I wrote.

I got a coin, on one side, it says "is ok" and on the other side it says "is o.k."

[everywhere and nowhere]

2 hours ago, AJ 0688 said:

I know it must be a pain to explain to people what certain things mean.

Not necessarily. I enjoy discussing it. I also believe that the full spectrum of asexual attitudes should be visible - including sex-averse and sex-repulsed aces (and, when it comes to political views, also those who dare not be sex-positive).

[Guest]

I just know that when it comes to my Asexuality I can fantasise about sex but when it actually comes to doing it with a man I'm not comfortable with it. I like the idea of companionship but not always big on romance with mild cuddles and can find kissing questionable/confusing. I find I can be aesthically look at a person (in my case a man) from a far and admire that he looks attractive but won't go out of my way to talk to them. Sex overall intimidates me and the male sex organ just grosses me out. 

 

My idea of a perfect get together with someone, friend or date, is a day at the bowling alley, playing bowling maybe some air hockey or maybe pool, a couple of arcade games and maybe a portrait from the machine that creates pencil portraits of people and then chatting over a big cheese pizza and some Pepsi. 

 

And an idea of a good guy to hang out with, someone who can hold a conversation with me and actually contribute to the conversation (not like my recent ex), someone I have somethings in common with but also someone I can have a comfortable repoir with. We have differences but that's OK. We like different things but we can share them together and learn about ourselves together

 

So out of all of that I got (from what limited words I have come to understand) I am aesthetically attract to men, I'm not against sex I just don't do it personally so would that be sex-averse? 

 

[everywhere and nowhere]

@AJ 0688 - I think it "qualifies" as sex-averse, particularly if you feel disgusted by penises and intimidated by the idea of having sex.

Asexual people usually aren't "against sex". They understand that sex is important for a lot of people, but just don't personally share that need. Also, many aces who have a libido are also able to fantasise about sex. For a lot of people it takes the form of third-person fantasies, as if they were observing it or - even more - creating a story. You may want to read more about the phenomenon of autochorissexuality, also known as anegosexuality (often spelled "aegosexuality", but even if it's more widespread - it's just incorrect). Some aces also may fantasise in first person, yet still not want to actually make their fantasies come true. It may have something to do precisely with sex aversion - sex-averse people may find it harder to fantasise in first person because such an idea feels distressing even just as a fantasy. At least this is how I personally feel - I always fantasise in third person because the idea of personally having sex feels horrible to me.