Jump to content
argar

45 Non-Sexual Physically Intimate Actions

Recommended Posts

Skullery Maid

Skinny dipping is better than baths, imo

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

How do two people even fit in one bath anyway?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

Skinny-dipping makes far more sense than bathing together, tbh.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid
4 minutes ago, Anthracite_Impreza said:

How do two people even fit in one bath anyway?

I honestly haven't a clue. ūüėā

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
Just now, Anthracite_Impreza said:

How do two people even fit in one bath anyway?

Easily? 

 

Either one at each end, with legs kind of intertwined or one against the other's lap. 

 

Of course doesn't work if you have a teeny tiny bath tub. I did it in a large tub, the kind with spa jets. 

 

And Tele yeah... my point is for it to not be a turn on (meaning likely a leadup to sex) it would be about cleaning together which is ew and not practical. Else, it seems quite sexual and not good on the list for 99.9% of the people I know. 

3 minutes ago, skullery said:

Skinny dipping is better than baths, imo

Mmm. Nah. Don't like swimming. I will stick to just pouring water over my spouse so she has to strip, or have a very wet shirt clinging to her body for a while, if I want to use water. ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

I love your stories. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Thing is, this is the way physical relationships work outside this artificial division of sexual / sensual / aesthetic / whatever that AVEN and certain other academic discourses love. They're just not separate, for any practical purpose. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

Thanks for that description, @Serran. It's led to a fun discussion about wet T-shirts and my penchant for not wearing bras.

 

Ok I'm just spamming AVEN with way too many sex thoughts today. ūüėā

Share this post


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

EitherÔĽŅ one at each end, with legs kind of intertwined or one against the otÔĽŅher's lap.¬†

That sounds so uncomfortable...

 

6 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Thing is, this is the way physical relationships work outside this artificial division of sexual / sensual / aesthetic / whatever that AVEN and certain other academic discourses love. They're just not separate, for any practical purpose. 

It makes sense if you don't experience them all, which by our very nature on here, most of us don't.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Well it's a way to think about them, but as a way to understand what sexuals experience, it's counterproductive. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

No but, sexuals can be sensual without it being a sexual thing too. I mean, most people wanna hug their kids or pets or whatever; that's sensual. A heterosexual can see a member of the same gender and appreciate their looks; that's aesthetic. So you guys can tell the difference, they just aren't usually named.

Share this post


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

No but, sexuals can be sensual without it being a sexual thing too. I mean, most people wanna hug their kids or pets or whatever; that's sensual. A heterosexual can see a member of the same gender and appreciate their looks; that's aesthetic. So you guys can tell the difference, they just aren't usually named.

All that is fine, but it's clear from the confusion round that list, there's plenty of situations where the distinctions just can't be made, and certainly aren't in anyone's head. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Thing is, this is the way physical relationships work outside this artificial division of sexual / sensual / aesthetic / whatever that AVEN and certain other academic discourses love. They're just not separate, for any practical purpose. 

They are seperate though, for practical purposes, for a lot of "regular" people. 

 

A lot of women I know would love if their husband was more intimate without making it sexual. It is a very, very common complaint that they can't do much without their spouses wanting sex. I listened to probably four hours of just that complaint this last year at work (if you combine it all from all the convos), from all my coworkers. "I wish I could just be closr and intimate with my husband without him leading it to sex all the time". 100% of my female coworkers agreed with that feeling, sharing all the things they wish they could do without sex coming up, just for the romantic intimacy. They separate the sexual and the romantic naturally, to the point their spouses not separating it makes them unhappy. For one woman, it was her #1 complaint about her marriage, everything else she is happy with. 

 

So, things you should try doing for your wife without making it about sex list is a useful idea. A lot of husbands of people I know need them. Their wives feel unloved and objectified quite often, because nothing can just be intimacy without being about sex. And it makes them unhappy not getting romance without sex. The whole "somewhere other than the night" song thing. 

 

But... I am pretty sure a bath together isn't going to be one of the things they don't want to lead to sex. Thats a pretty foreplayey activity, rather than a nice intimate one to make your wife feel loved without feeling like sex is all there is to your love. 

 

So I love the idea of the list. I think romance without sex is important, not just for aces, but for sexuals too. It is something I think more of those wives should be discussing with their husbands, so more articles to make people aware and offer openings to help discuss it is a good thing imo. I just question the addition of a few things on the list. 

 

I mean, I guess some foreplay like things can be without sex leading up and fulfill romantic intimacy needs (a lot of what my wife and I do just playing would count). But, if you need a list to think of things to do without making them sex... maybe leave out those ones, it doesn't fit. 

 

 

@skullery @CBC Glad I could help make an interesting convo. :lol:

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

All that is fine, but it's clear from the confusion round that list, there's plenty of situations where the distinctions just can't be made, and certainly aren't in anyone's head. 

True. I certainly experience romance and sensual together, to where I can't imagine romance without our version of intimacy.

 

On that note, #46 Kissing tyres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Serran, you're actually saying pretty much the same thing as me - that touch in the small of the back or whatever isn't immediately sexual, but it's not non-sexual either, because its absence lessens sexual attraction for one of the couple. It's also sensual because for most people, being touched by your lover just feels good on your skin, or touching them feels good. I could probably make the same kind of observations about pretty much everything on that list. And I agree with you, it's a good idea for the kind of - mostly - male who thinks all touch has to lead to sex; and for that kind of man, sexual and sensual and aesthetic are intertwined. Honking his wife's boobs is clearly sexual, for him it's sensual because they feel nice in his hand, and aesthetic because he likes to look at them.

 

In both scenarios, sexual, sensual and aesthetic are intertwined. It's sexual because it's sensually pleasant, and aesthetically pleasing because it's sensual, and sexual because (in part) it's aesthetically pleasing - I can't be arsed to work through all the combinations, but you get the picture. This is why regarding them discretely is just unhelpful and inaccurate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Serran, you're actually saying pretty much the same thing as me - that touch in the small of the back or whatever isn't immediately sexual, but it's not non-sexual either, because its absence lessens sexual attraction for one of the couple. It's also sensual because for most people, being touched by your lover just feels good on your skin, or touching them feels good. I could probably make the same kind of observations about pretty much everything on that list. And I agree with you, it's a good idea for the kind of - mostly - male who thinks all touch has to lead to sex; and for that kind of man, sexual and sensual and aesthetic are intertwined. Honking his wife's boobs is clearly sexual, for him it's sensual because they feel nice in his hand, and aesthetic because he likes to look at them.

 

In both scenarios, sexual, sensual and aesthetic are intertwined. It's sexual because it's sensually pleasant, and aesthetically pleasing because it's sensual, and sexual because (in part) it's aesthetically pleasing - I can't be arsed to work through all the combinations, but you get the picture. This is why regarding them discretely is just unhelpful and inaccurate.

Mm. Well, yes, they are intertwined emotionally. But, they are separate in practical application  in a lot of cases. For example, emotionally, kissing is sexual for that type of person (most likely). But, in practice, there are ways to make kissing non-sexual and more sensual so his wife feels loved and not objectified. Even if he is feeling sexual attraction more strongly during. 

 

So, it is useful to discuss them in seperate terms. And I think more people need to realize they are seperating them naturally, so they can just ask for their own needs. 

 

Though, yeah, dont need to go as far into seperating as discussions here go. But, I think society in general links them too much, leaving people struggling when they want to experience one without the other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

I think separating them explicitly just leads to confusion. Why not focus on what sex/touch does within their relationship rather than compiling lists of redefined words? What's needed is to be more holistic, not more reductive. If you want to get someone to understand something, start with how they see the world and go from there, rather than insist they reconceptualise the world in a way that makes no sense to them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anisotrophic

I appreciate that people aren't self aware of what is sexual and what isn't, and holistic affection is nice, but I don't think it's all that complicated.

 

This list is rolling a bunch of stuff together and as @Serran says, there's a lot of flirtation and foreplay stuff you simply wouldn't do if it weren't somehow *hoping* for sex, referring to that desire, anticipating it.

 

It was posted on AVEN like it might be helpful for sexuals to, uh, learn what non-sexual affection looks like and I think the list is confusing and overcomplicating this. Just think about the physical affection people have as kids? That's not sexual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nima

22: .". Whisper sweet nothings into her ear when you’re out together in a group setting."

 

oh please don't. This is annoying and even if you enjoy this sort of attention,  it has no place in a group setting. Distraction. And what are sweet nothings anyway? Nothings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

Kinda reminds me of being in line at the pharmacy several years ago and watching the couple in front of me. The dude kept squeezing the woman's buttcheeks.

 

Also many years ago when I was... 13-14, maybe... I was in the concert band at my school, and we put on a show one evening towards the end of the school year. After it was over, my mum told me about the parents sitting in front of her and my dad. The wife kept running her hands through her husband's hair and down his neck, and whispering to him. Ffs, can you not fondle your partner at your kid's school event?!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nima

I was never comfortable with public displays of affection. It separates the ones involved from the rest of their surroundings. Hence "get a room". Go somewhere where you can give each other undivided attention if that's what you crave. I don't have to watch it anymore than be involved in it. Sometimes it even seems disrespectful towards the people around.

Fine, a peck or holding hands as an affirmation of "belonging". But if you're in any group setting,  be with the group or go do something else. 

 

Some of these points are old school how to be a gentleman standards, and others are obvious how to butter her up to get in her pants moves.

 

Be yourself is a good approach,  because is she gonna appreciate you without all those cheap tricks? These tips are like make up and push up bras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nima
21 minutes ago, CBC said:

TheÔĽŅ dude kept squeezing the woman's buttcheeks.

I'm embarrassed for her

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

Hopefully for her sake she didn't mind. And I'm not a prude, but honestly I find it inappropriate. At least save it for a leisurely walk through a park not heavily populated with people, if you're gonna be butt-squeezing in public. In line at the store is not the place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
argar

Seems like a form of dominant behavior, but I am just making an assumption. 

 

I had a similar incident once.

 

It bugged me to see it.

 

On the other hand, it didn't really bother me too much when it happened to me in high school. 

 

To clarify, it was a random female student, we didn't know each other or anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anisotrophic

Public displays of non-sexual affection is totally fine with me.

 

Public displays of sexual affection, no.  My  sense is that the people doing it (at least one of them) are aroused by exhibitionism, and they're using me as an unwilling participant in their sex act. hell yeah that is disrespectful.

 

I ain't a prude, I've had a threesome and would do it again. Sex is great with people that want to do it ;)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
greynonomous

The one about pulling hair while making out... Eh? That one is only happening in a sexualized situation.

 

I've had baths and swims with my family where I was naked as a kid growing up, and hit tubs/steam rooms can have that happen and aren't sexual at all. Shared bathing in Japan is common and a family thing...

 

Buuuuut,the connotation in the article is more along the lines of 'here's stuff to try and flirt physically that aren't straight up sex'

 

Interesting that we all agree the tone was deaf, but focused on different ones in the list though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrDane

Well, it is a fine list, and even a bit mechanical touch can be better than none. I think, I do some of these. It is a natural part of being two and being considerate and having/showing empathy. Just have to remember that these are not foreplay in order to come to the love part, these are signs of love in them selves. But in a wellcfunctioning sexual-sexual relationship, these could very well be a natural step towards having sex later on, while they build up a nice vibe between the couple. And often a hug or a soft touch is also where you find/feel that this is actually what you needed from the loving partner. The difference between foreplay and the list is that foreplay is a social construction with a goal, aproduct: sex. In this,  the goal is to be present in the process and the outcome, which is ongoing, is intimate twosomeness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
glyders
On 7/6/2019 at 12:10 PM, CBC said:

Oh yeah, no, not a substitute at all. If anyone thinks any of these things would suffice instead, they're nuts.

I'd be so happy to be allowed to do many of these. I ache to hug my partner, but that is too sexual for her to deal with.

I shouldn't be complaining. I had my annual 'summer holiday holding hands while walking for a minute' ration of contact a few weeks ago and am still in the glow from it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC
On 8/10/2019 at 3:44 AM, glyders said:

I'd be so happy to be allowed to do many of these. I ache to hug my partner, but that is too sexual for her to deal with.

I shouldn't be complaining. I had my annual 'summer holiday holding hands while walking for a minute' ration of contact a few weeks ago and am still in the glow from it. 

Oh goodness, I'm sorry to hear that any type of affectionate physical contact is that limited. That's gotta be difficult. I don't think I would be able to think of it as a romantic relationship at all without physical closeness. Like honestly, no sex would pretty much kill that part off for me, because I can't imagine romantic feelings never being able to be channelled into sex. I do fully understand that it doesn't work that way for asexuals, that makes sense to me, but on a personal level I can't separate the two, so. Of course I can also see how lots of physical affection that never ever led to sex could theoretically be even more painful, so... I dunno. Probably a highly individual thing.

 

At any rate, I'm sorry that affection is that rare for you. ūüėē

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
glyders

It's better than not having any company at all. And I have had more sex with her than in the rest of my life, it just all happened in the first year or so (up to conceiving our first child) and then a couple of times four years later (for our second). Then nothing for the last eight years. She realised she was ace a couple of years ago.

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...