Jump to content

Archived

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

Carsonspire

Asexual relationship between two sexuals

Recommended Posts

Carsonspire

While responding to DJ’s question of the week here, ghosts and I started a discussion about the semantics of sexual and asexual relationships. Asexuals often form intimate relationships with other asexuals or with sexuals, yet rarely do we hear of two sexuals forming an asexual relationship together. In this context, I posed the following question:

Can/do/does it make sense for sexuals to form intimate asexual relationships with other sexuals, and/or would persons in such a relationship be likely to not identify completely with the labels "sexual" or "asexual", thus making the question a mute point anyway?

We could summarize this as follows:

A = Asexual

S = Sexual

A + A --> Asexual bond, asexual relationship

A + S --> Asexual-Sexual bond, varying degrees of a/sexuality

S + S --> Sexual bond, BUT could this ever form an asexual bond??

Thoughts? Comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orbit

Interesting question. I think it would depend on the individual sexuals involved. I would instead say it matters if there is sexual tension or not and what they decided to do about it.

If you had two sexuals who were sexually attracted to each other but opted for some reason not to act on it, that would be a celibate relationship.

If you had two sexuals and only one was sexually attracted to the other and the other sexual wasn't sexually attracted back, but still wanted a relationship, that is fuzzy and I think it decides if they want to have sex or not that makes it sexual or not. And for all intents and purposes, this is very similar to a sexual/asexual relationship.

If you have two sexuals who experience sexual attraction, just not for each other and yet wanted to be in a relationship, that is very much like an asexual relationship.

So I guess I think it depends what the sexuals feel for each other... not all sexuals are attracted to each other. :D (can you imagine the world if they were??)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rabger
If you had two sexuals who were sexually attracted to each other but opted for some reason not to act on it' date=' that would be a celibate relationship.[/quote']

Celbibate relationship, no-sexual relationship. Same thing, so I'll agree witht hat point.

If you had two sexuals and only one was sexually attracted to the other and the other sexual wasn't sexually attracted back' date=' but still wanted a relationship, that is fuzzy and I think it decides if they want to have sex or not that makes it sexual or not. And for all intents and purposes, this is very similar to a sexual/asexual relationship.[/quote']

If you have two sexuals who experience sexual attraction, just not for each other and yet wanted to be in a relationship, that is very much like an asexual relationship.

The problem I have with this is mainly that Carsonspire didn't give enough detail in regard to the situation. Maybe, Carsonspire, you could elaborate? Are we talking a romantic situation here, or just a best friend type situation?? Because there is a huge difference and if its friends, I don't see why throwing an orienation label on it would make any sense. You wouldn't call 2 straight female best friends a lesbian relationship unless it was of sexual or romantic nature.

To the point though, I already went over that in something else a while back. Asexual does not equal non-sexual in that "sexual" can be both orientation and action, whereas I don't believe asexual can. If we start using asexual to mean no sexual activity in regard to relationships, we are saying asexuals cant have sex. If we are basing the title on emotional levels, it still does not change the fact that these two individuals are sexual, not asexual. If we start throwing around stuff like "asexual relationship" and slapping the label on sexuals as well, just because they're friends (which is what it is if the romantic and/or sexual attraction isn't there), we might as well not call ourselves anything because its not going to matter, no one will understand because we're just making asexuality more complicated. Asexuality is an orienation, not a marker for inactivity.

Even if the two sexuals both lack sexual attraction/desire for each other, they are still quite capable of it. As I said, nothing was said about the romantic level they have for each other in this example. I don't see why everything has to be based around the sexual issues. Hetero-sexual, always, instead of hetero-romantic first, for example. Why is sexual so more important than emotional? If these 2 sexuals do not have sexual attraction/desire for each other but form a strong romantic bond, why not just say that they're in a romantic relationshop? Leave the sexual or asexual terms out of it. We're just going to confuse the hell out of people even more than we do just existing as is. And if they're just really good friends, they're friends! Don't confuse asexuality with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carsonspire
The problem I have with this is mainly that Carsonspire didn't give enough detail in regard to the situation. Maybe, Carsonspire, you could elaborate? Are we talking a romantic situation here, or just a best friend type situation?? Because there is a huge difference and if its friends, I don't see why throwing an orienation label on it would make any sense. You wouldn't call 2 straight female best friends a lesbian relationship unless it was of sexual or romantic nature.

The "situation" is completely theoretical. I am neither referring to a romantic relationship, nor a best-friend relationship. What I am referring to is a close relationship that defies these definitions--one that is beyond "just friendship" yet is not romantic, but is just as important as a romantic relationship. It's not the labels I'm concerned about so much as it is the relationship itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carsonspire

Hmm. After some more thought, I've come to the conclusion that what I'm actually trying to describe is an unintentionally celibate relationship, which when you strip away the semantics is essentially a celibate relationship. Thanks for beating some sense into me, Orbit and Rabger. It was an interesting theory for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BunnyK.

Sexual POV:

If these 2 sexuals do not have sexual attraction/desire for each other but form a strong romantic bond, why not just say that they're in a romantic relationshop?

Mostly, for a sexual, that wouldn't happen. I mean, it's definitely not impossible or unheard of, but the sexual drive is often so intertwined with the romantic drive that if you liked someone a lot but weren't attracted to them, you'd class them as a friend and look for someone else who you both liked a lot AND were attracted to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf X Omega

I Never say never(Ops, just said twice X_X). Anyway, most sexuals cannot live without sex, two sexuals, is even harder, because both share the same desire to do it, but, if in an case they aren't interested in having sex with their partners, but they absolutely don't want to ruin the relationship with infidelity, then i guess it could be considered an "Asexual moment" in the relationship, but eventually by the sexual pressure one of 'em would crack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazelwudi
Mostly, for a sexual, that wouldn't happen. I mean, it's definitely not impossible or unheard of, but the sexual drive is often so intertwined with the romantic drive that if you liked someone a lot but weren't attracted to them, you'd class them as a friend and look for someone else who you both liked a lot AND were attracted to.

Aye. *nods*

To me, friendship is basically having a concern for and high regard of another person as a human being, and has nothing to do with romance or sex.

Friendship can be joined by a sexual attraction component, though. When that happens, it can transform into a different sort of relationship.

If I can use an analogy from basic chemistry here...

Acid + Base => Salt + Water

Friendship + Sexual attraction => Romance + Sex

To me, romance is inseperable from sexual attraction. Without sexual attraction, it's a friendship... not a romance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nightmare

I'm sexual and I would prefer a celibate (or however described) relationship. But that might class me as not an average sexual, I don't know.

About the romance and sex thing though, for me, they're entirely separate (equally insane perhaps, but that's not the point) 'feelings' that sometimes evoke the other. Maybe it's like if you had kiwi and starfruit, and at different times you liked either one or the other, but somehow they had this tendancy to make you want the other? Actually that analogy is several layers off, and I just cursed kiwi, sorry... (starfruit can go run into a cleaver for all I care)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazelwudi
I'm sexual and I would prefer a celibate (or however described) relationship. But that might class me as not an average sexual, I don't know.

About the romance and sex thing though, for me, they're entirely separate (equally insane perhaps, but that's not the point) 'feelings' that sometimes evoke the other. Maybe it's like if you had kiwi and starfruit, and at different times you liked either one or the other, but somehow they had this tendancy to make you want the other? Actually that analogy is several layers off, and I just cursed kiwi, sorry... (starfruit can go run into a cleaver for all I care)

I can't see them as separate. Don't get me wrong, I like getting flowers, long walks in moonlight, and all whatnot, but there eventually comes a point where I'm like, "Ok, ok... I get the point. You're a nice guy. Now are we going to f*ck, or what?"

Not all sexuals are alike. Hehe.

When I was an undergrad, some female friends of mine were passing around a copy of Delta of Venus, by Anaïs Nin. It was the first time I'd encountered a copy of the book, but I'd widely heard it described as "erotica" before. Well, I borrowed it and read it.

God, what an unsatisfying read! It was the erotica equivalent of the Old Man and the Sea... winds on to where it's just boring the hell out of you and never gets to the point. By the time I was at the end, I was thinking, "Do any of these people actually plan on f*cking some day before it snows in hell? Erotica, my ass."

I handed it back to one of my female friends and didn't bother to hide my opinion of the book. One of them seemed taken aback, and said "Yes, but everything is described sensually." I told her that for me enjoying romance without sex is akin to somehow "enjoying" a good meal without being able to swallow.

Infinatebog, your rl name wouldn't be Carrie, by any chance? You remind me of her. hehe :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nightmare

No I don't have an 'ie' name (or y, or ko, whatever) thank god, but my dad seems to forget that sometimes, which is uncomfortable.

Just agreeing with you though on the subject of borng porn. I mean in most cases it's terrible writing, even the best, so what's the point of dragging it out like that? Not that I haven't read porn out of boredom and at my least sexual... my life is sad sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazelwudi
No I don't have an 'ie' name (or y, or ko, whatever) thank god, but my dad seems to forget that sometimes, which is uncomfortable.

Just agreeing with you though on the subject of borng porn. I mean in most cases it's terrible writing, even the best, so what's the point of dragging it out like that? Not that I haven't read porn out of boredom and at my least sexual... my life is sad sometimes.

This is going to sound ... (primitive? disturbing?) ... I suspect, but for me reading erotica satisfies much the same purpose that looking at porn does for many males. To wit, if it doesn't eventually involve people f*cking with wild abandon, I feel cheated and let down. lol :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sonofzeal
This is going to sound ... (primitive? disturbing?) ... I suspect, but for me reading erotica satisfies much the same purpose that looking at porn does for many males. To wit, if it doesn't eventually involve people f*cking with wild abandon, I feel cheated and let down. lol :P

I'm with you on that one, even though I'm male. Lemon fanfics are sooo much better than seeing skantily clad ladies gyrate their hips. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...