What being a sex favorable asexual means to me

[gray-a girl]

I know this is a super controversial topic (though, really, my existence shouldn’t be controversial) but I wanted to clarify some things about what (for me) being a sex favorable asexual is about. I will only talk about my experience being a sex favorable asexual, since I don’t know how others are.

 

I have seen the phrase “has a desire for partnered sex” as describing sex favorable asexuals. I have been thinking about it, and I’m not so sure that that is accurate, for me. What I desire is to orgasm and feel sexual pleasure. How it’s done isn’t as important, except for variety. But having sex with a partner is like a communal activity and a way to get close to someone emotionally. 

 

If variety wasn’t something I wanted and emotional closeness wasn’t important, I’d probably prefer sexual stimulation and orgasming that isn’t sex. However I am also kinky so, a lack of control is important to me, so it really helps to have another person help me get there, even if we aren’t having sex. But again it doesn’t have to be sex. I do not desire sex, I desire orgasming.

 

Actually in the big picture, I think non intercourse types of sexual activities are probably better in general. Simply because most women can’t orgasm from just sex. I haven’t had sex a lot so I’m not really sure how I would feel if a partner I was with wanted to have sex all the time, but not do non-intercourse sexual activity. I think, I probably wouldn’t be too crazy about it. But then again since women can’t usually orgasm from just sex, even allosexual women, I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

 

I guess in a nutshell, the defining thing for me is that I like orgasming and feeling sexual pleasure, and because I have a lack of control kink, it’s better if someone else is in charge of that. But if my partner never wanted to have sex and instead just wanted me to orgasm or find sexual pleasure from non-intercourse activities ? I wouldn’t feel like I was missing anything, I’d be ok with that. Right now though, I would still like to have sex for the variety and because I haven’t done it that much. I just don’t need it.

 

That, to me, is how I experience sex favorable Asexuality.

 

And, I’m sure, I will get some arrogant asexuals claiming I’m not asexual. Yeah, well, if you feel like posting that, save it, I’m not interested. 

 

[Charna]

No one "needs" sex. Some sexual people can be celibate of their own volition and some sexual people are happy about being celibate. I'd prefer if people would stop implying that sexual activities are a somehow necessary or required part of human existence. Procreation is required for the survival of the species, but that's about it.

[Iam9man]

Thanks for sharing @gray-a girl.
 

I’ll share too: To me being a sex-favourable asexual means I can enjoy sex under the right circumstances. I actually identified as sex-indifferent for ages, but chatting to other aces I realised I am so much more favourable than most others that it makes more sense for me to identify this way.

 

I’m attracted to and seek out partnered foreplay. Orgasms physically feel good but I’m indifferent/repulsed about any sort of intercourse to get there. I’d be happy never having sex again, but am also happy to have sex occasionally whilst in a relationship.

 

That being said, I can absolutely enjoy sex if I’m attracted to the person in other ways. I simply need to concentrate on the romantic, aesthetic or sensual attraction I’m feeling whilst having sex so I don’t lose interest.

[Philip027]

Quote

What I desire is to orgasm and feel sexual pleasure. How it’s done isn’t as important,

The thing is, when trying to determine if someone just generally experiences libido (something aces can experience) or if they have an outright desire to have sex with other people (something that typically defines sexuals), that distinction becomes rather important.

 

Quote

I do not desire sex, I desire orgasming.

Two people interacting with each other with the goal of "orgasming" is... sex.  You're making a Distinction Without a Difference.

[Rynn]

@gray-a girl 

Generally it's good to first get clear on what you mean with the terms you're using, so that you don't talk past one another.  

 

So, just so I can better understand what you mean, when you say 'sex', you are only talking about PiV? Other types (fellatio, cunnilingus, dryhumping, whatever) are 'sexual', but not 'sex', correct?

If I did not assume that correctly, what do you mean with 'non-intercourse sexual activities', and are you sure that 'women can't usually orgasm just from sex'? 

 

On AVEN most people define sex as 'an activity between two or more people involving genital stimulation', so that's a bit broader.

[Charna]

2 minutes ago, Laurann said:

On AVEN most people define sex as 'an activity between two or more people involving genital stimulation', so that's a bit broader.

It's not just aven. I'd say plenty of sexual people define sex without intercourse as 'still counts as sex'.

[everywhere and nowhere]

@Laurann - seconded. I hate perceiving only PIV as "sex" and other forms of sexual contact as "not yet sex". This is heavily heterosexist, it erases lesbians (by perpetuating the myth that lesbian sex can't be "real sex"), it is also harmful for straight women since they, as also OP mentioned, typically enjoy other forms of sex more than PIV, so they and their partners need assurance that PIV is not the pinnacle of sexual experience or the "most correct" way to have sex.

[Rynn]

4 minutes ago, Charna said:

It's not just aven. I'd say plenty of sexual people define sex without intercourse as 'still counts as sex'.

Yeah, you're right. I just said 'on AVEN' because that's where this discussion is taking place, so I thought that was the most relevant part of the world for this discussion  

[Philip027]

Quote

So, just so I can better understand what you mean, when you say 'sex', you are only talking about PiV? Other types (fellatio, cunnilingus, dryhumping, whatever) are 'sexual', but not 'sex', correct?

I did get that vibe from the OP (that they were only thinking of PiV as "sex") and yeah, it's definitely broader than that.

 

If it involves the sexual organs, it's unmistakably sex.  (By extension, if it involves "orgasming" as the goal, guess what -- orgasm involves the sexual organs, so it's sex.)  If it's something like kissing or whatever, it's more vague.  It depends on what the intention of the kissing is, mainly.  If it's intended to be a lead-in to something more clearly sexual, then the kissing has become part of the whole sexual "process".

[everywhere and nowhere]

3 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

By extension, if it involves "orgasming" as the goal, guess what -- orgasm involves the sexual organs, so it's sex.)

Not exactly. Orgasm can also be achieved through self-stimulation - which is a "sexual activity", but isn't "sex". Don't push sex-averse people who have never had partnered sex, but pleasure themselves, to say that they supposedly "have had sex" or, even worse, "are sexually active".

[Philip027]

I was very clearly talking about partnered activity there.  I didn't think it needed to be explicitly said that if it was solo it isn't sex, because that's fucking obvious.

[neverlove]

I don’t experience attraction, but sex sounds fun. 

 

To put it another way: I’m hungry but nothing sounds good to eat.

[neverlove]

When did this thread change to “defining sex”?

[everywhere and nowhere]

14 minutes ago, neverlove said:

I don’t experience attraction, but sex sounds fun. 

To me it's the opposite: I experience attraction, but sex sounds terrifying.

So I experience attraction without any desire to actually have sex with anyone.

[Galactic Turtle]

I was going to type a whole thing but this is AVEN so I know it would be fruitless if I did. XD

 

Anyway, given what you've written it makes sense that you ID (I assume) as gray-a.

 

Whether or not gray-a and "sex favorable ace" are interchangeable is up for debate.

[Philip027]

Quote

When did this thread change to “defining sex”?

It didn't "change" to that; it is a critical aspect of the very first post in the thread.

[neverlove]

9 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

It didn't "change" to that; it is a critical aspect of the very first post in the thread.

Was it though? The topic is what “sex favorable means to her”. She was stating her experience—not inviting comments on that—and opening up a discussion about what other sex favorables experience. 

 

Do allosexuals have to specify how they define sex in order to discuss how they feel about their identities? I’m not sure we should perpetuate this double standard.

 

[Noego]

I understand what the OP means. I'm not dissimilar myself in what she describes. Its just the way it is. For me  

[mausgrau]

1 hour ago, neverlove said:

When did this thread change to “defining sex”?

Well, since OP seems to have a very narrow view of what constitutes sex (while at the same time an extremely expansive, pretty-much-anything-goes perspective on "asexuality"), it might be pertinent, no?

[Charna]

21 minutes ago, neverlove said:

Do allosexuals have to specify how they define sex in order to discuss how they feel about their identities? I’m not sure we should perpetuate this double standard.

 

It's not a problem when you are straight and fit the society norms maybe. But when discussing minority sexual orientations it becomes important. "Lesbians sex is not a real sex" is a classic example why. So no, it's not a double standard to ask for clarification, considering one of the commonly used definitions of asexuality is "no desire for partnered sex."

[mausgrau]

3 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

some arrogant asexuals 

[uhtred]

I think people use the term "sex" differently. I think that there are a lot of women who enjoy sexual activity but would not want only PIV.  (there are a lot of men in that category too).   There are presumably some who enjoy a variety of sexual activities but don't like PIV at all.  That can make "asexuality" somewhat of a confusing term.  It clearly applies to people who do not want sexual activity of any sort, and clearly doesn't apply to people who actively enjoy  / seek-out sexual activity that includes PIV, but in between there is a wide range. 

 

Since the OP seemed to be indicating that she had different levels of interest in different sexual activity, I think the definition question is on topic.

 

In general I think labels are only useful if they happen to match a person's reality.  Often people's sexuality doesn't fit into any specific label. 

[Philip027]

Quote

Was it though?

Yes, it was.

 

Quote

The topic is what “sex favorable means to her”. She was stating her experience—not inviting comments on that—and opening up a discussion about what other sex favorables experience. 

Any sort of meaningful conversation on the subject cannot be had without an agreed-upon definition of sex.

 

By the OP trying to separate "sex" from "orgasming (with another person's help)", I can't help but feel like there is some kind of disconnect between what the OP believes sex to be and what pretty much everyone else understands it to be, because they are... pretty much the same thing.  It just comes across a lot like someone trying to insist they're not gay even though they are only ever shown to like and pursue relationships with people of their own sex.

 

Quote

Do allosexuals have to specify how they define sex in order to discuss how they feel about their identities? I’m not sure we should perpetuate this double standard.

They don't typically have to because it's unnecessary.  They, more or less, understand what sex is.  They don't try to write it off as "orgasming with other people" as if that were something distinct from sex, which it isn't.

[neverlove]

9 minutes ago, Charna said:

It's not a problem when you are straight and fit the society norms maybe. But when discussing minority sexual orientations it becomes important. "Lesbians sex is not a real sex" is a classic example why. So no, it's not a double standard to ask for clarification, considering one of the commonly used definitions of asexuality is "no desire for partnered sex."

 

She wasn’t.

 

It is a double standard because she would have to show her knowledge of asexuality, it’s definition, and explain her own experience more precisely in order for people to believe she is asexual. It wouldn’t matter if she had the “default” orientation, but it seems you have to receive proper recognition to be on this side of the rainbow.

 

I honestly don’t understand her experience of asexuality, but I don’t understand any of the romantic identities either. Picking on her definition of sex is a way of challenging her sexuality. 

 

Laurann did ask for clarification rather than making an assumption.

[everywhere and nowhere]

On 10/8/2019 at 4:47 PM, uhtred said:

I think people use the term "sex" differently. I think that there are a lot of women who enjoy sexual activity but would not want only PIV.  (there are a lot of men in that category too).   There are presumably some who enjoy a variety of sexual activities but don't like PIV at all.  That can make "asexuality" somewhat of a confusing term.  It clearly applies to people who do not want sexual activity of any sort, and clearly doesn't apply to people who actively enjoy  / seek-out sexual activity that includes PIV, but in between there is a wide range. 

Yes, but a lot of people are just confused. Much needed emphasis on "foreplay" can - as we can see - also lead to an impression that foreplay is "not yet sex". Some people can get rather agressive in defending their views, but I have also seen people who would fully fall into the category of "people thinking that they might be asexual just because of conflicting definitions of what constitutes sex". I have seen a gay man who thought that he might be asexual because he doesn't like anal sex, straight men who though that they might be asexual because they don't like PIV... But both of these are obviously just a part of possible partnered sexual activities. These guys actually easily accepted the explanation that if they don;'t like an activity considered particularly important for their orientation, but enjoy other things, this is not what "asexual" means.

I'm anyway against hierarchisation of sexual activities - against perpetuating ideas that PIV is "more mature" or whatever than oral sex, or, also, that partnered sex is inherently better than self-pleasuring... For me it's quite the opposite - I have a libido, I admit that erotic stimulation feels good, but for reasons other that "it supposedly not feeling good" having partnered sex is completely unacceptable for me - more than "unacceptable", in fact, it just feels psychologically impossible. So autoeroticism is a way to get some pleasure without the distress of partnered sex... Obviously, for a lot of people it's otherwise. But people who desire sex simply aren't "more normal" or "more mature" than those who don't, and people who don't like a sexual activity considered typical for their orientation are no weirdoes, at most - people with very slightly untypical preferences.

In fact, it may even be not untypical at all. Example one: straight people and PIV - it's a well-known fact that for most heterosexual women activities considered "foreplay" are more interesting than PIV, some women don't like PIV at all. Example two: gay men and anal sex - in fact a sizeable percentage on gays don't like anal sex and prefer oral. Still there is a belief that "gay sex = anal sex"* - in my opinion largely because of the habit of comparing all sexual activities (also gay, lesbian, non-partnered) to the heterosexual "template" and resulting belief that the fullest form of gay sex must be one which is the closest "imitation" of PIV...

*What's even "better", this stereotype even works the other way around. OK, I can understand - though I don't share this view - that pegging scares many straight men and women, who may think "Does it mean that I'm / he's gay?". But come on, anal sex with the woman as receiving partner seems already "mainstream"... Have you heard of the rapist ("pick up artist") known as Roosh V? I have read a bit about his exploits on We Hunted the Mammoth (for example, his flirtation with real Neo-Nazis, until he realised that for such people he is himself some "beige", West Asian subhuman...). It seems that this disgusting specimen even believes - and warns other men - that having anal sex with a girl is the first step to turning gay...

[neverlove]

44 minutes ago, Whatsis said:

Well, since OP seems to have a very narrow view of what constitutes sex (while at the same time an extremely expansive, pretty-much-anything-goes perspective on "asexuality"), it might be pertinent, no?

Sex favorable asexuality is not what I would call “anything goes”. It falls solidly with the official definition. She was using “sex” to refer to “intercourse”. This is an accepted definition. This does not mean it is the only definition of sex she acknowledges, nor did she specify what other activities she would consider.

 

This is only relevant if she needs to explain her sexuality to us. She does not, and therefore I question its relevance to the discussion.

[neverlove]

@Nowhere Girl

 

I agree that all of this can be “sex”. However, then we get into the territory of “is all sexual contact sex”.

 

And I still don’t think this thread is the place for this discussion.

[Philip027]

Quote

Picking on her definition of sex is a way of challenging her sexuality. 

When someone is basing their position on a questionable (or clearly erroneous) statement, yeah, that's gonna happen.

 

"I'm not gay; I just prefer to bang other dudes"

"I'm not in love with you; I'm just crushing on you/I just want to be around you all the time/I just put your needs over my own"

"I don't wanna have sex with other people, I just wanna have orgasms with them"

 

Again, this is called making a Distinction Without a Difference.  It's at the root of much of the "controversy" mentioned by the OP.

 

Quote

She was using “sex” to refer to “intercourse”. This is an accepted definition.

It's very much not an "accepted" definition, because that erases many people's (such as lesbians') sexual experiences that don't involve intercourse.  "Sex" is broader than that.

 

Let's be real here; all it is is just another way to try to say you want to screw other people without actually explicitly saying it (so that you can TECHNICALLY keep saying you're asexual).  Much like the whole "desires orgasming with other people" thing.  Can we call a spade a spade, here?  It's still sex.

 

Quote

I agree that all of this can be “sex”. However, then we get into the territory of “is all sexual contact sex”.

 

And I still don’t think this thread is the place for this discussion.

I think it's the perfect place.  Again, this discussion (as you envision it to be, anyway) isn't meaningful without an understood, agreed-upon definition of what sex is in the first place.

[Winged Whisperer]

I firmly believe that sex favorable asexuals are valid and can exist, and I've seen some. Being sex favorable isn't an orientation, it's an attitude towards sex. Asexuality is the orientation. Attitudes can also change. Sometimes they can change in a span of a day depending on mood. I generally am sex indifferent, but sometimes when I'm feeling really bad, anxious or dysphoric I can veer into being sex repulsed. I'd be lying to say that I never enjoyed sex either. But even when I did enjoy sex, I didn't actively seek it, I didn't have that intrinsic desire that an allosexual has. Some people have consistent patterns of attitudes towards sex, and that's valid too and hence prefer to identify with an additional label. But if you're asexual, by definition you don't have any sexual preference (and no, that's not pansexuality) and have no desire for partnered sex where you want to get it hot with someone.

[mausgrau]

19 minutes ago, neverlove said:

This is only relevant if she needs to explain her sexuality to us. She does not, and therefore I question its relevance to the discussion.

What!? OP started a topic doing exactly that, voluntarily and unprompted -- "explain her sexuality to us."

 

Plus at the end throwing in some attitude about "arrogant asexuals" insisting on their own understanding of Asexuality that might somewhat differ from hers...