Jump to content

Sexuality explained to asexuals


like a foreigner

Recommended Posts

like a foreigner

Hi everybody!

 

I am an asexual in a relationship with a sexual person for a bit more than 6 months now. 

As it is my very first relationship, i felt the need to  read a lot about asexuality and how to handle it. Since i don't know any other asexual person, I have been looking on the internet (especially on forums) for some information and feedback. 

The point is: I found a lot of website trying to explain asexuality to sexual people. But what I need is an explanation of sexuality for asexuals. Indeed, I don't get it. At all. Why do some people like sex? What drives them? How do they feel when they say "I want to have sex with you"? 

 

Thanks for you help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok. um. let's try this.

here is an image I am pretty sure you will find pleasing:
 

Spoiler

a69ccda4c3970334a528788372b035fd.jpg


but...I don't know why it would be pleasing. there is something deep within the human mind that most of the time when the geometric aspects going on there are presented to it it says "YES" like some sort of internet shiba inu

but it is pretty, isn't it?

we are strange computers, with strange programing to get us doing the sort of things it seems like are a good idea for us to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you ever get cravings for certain foods, or feel like you need release through a certain activity? Is there any song you ever feel you need to listen to for you to get some kind of feeling of release or enjoyment? That's how I understand sexuality as felt by other people. There's variation in the range, intensity, frequency, and depth of sexual attraction or desire, just as for these other things. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a sexual with a partner who identifies as sex-indifferent asexual, I'd say the really driving factor for me is the vulnerability of sex – in me being vulnerable to another, and another choosing to be vulnerable to me – is a core part of how I express love and feel loved.

There are other reasons for sex. But "connection to love" is a major factor for sex within ongoing relationships.

Link to post
Share on other sites
like a foreigner
7 hours ago, anisotrophic said:

As a sexual with a partner who identifies as sex-indifferent asexual, I'd say the really driving factor for me is the vulnerability of sex – in me being vulnerable to another, and another choosing to be vulnerable to me – is a core part of how I express love and feel loved.

This is a really interesting point of view, which particularly caught my attention. I like your use of the word "vulnerability".

With regard to sexuality, I would have never imagined vulnerability to be a positive and reciprocal thing. On the contrary, in what I imagine of sex between a man and a woman, the woman is vulnerable to the man (in a rather negative way) but not the other way around. I know this representation is (certainly) wrong, and I would like to get rid of it, but it is not that easy to get rid of something which is deep in your mind...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, like a foreigner said:

This is a really interesting point of view, which particularly caught my attention. I like your use of the word "vulnerability".

With regard to sexuality, I would have never imagined vulnerability to be a positive and reciprocal thing. On the contrary, in what I imagine of sex between a man and a woman, the woman is vulnerable to the man (in a rather negative way) but not the other way around. I know this representation is (certainly) wrong, and I would like to get rid of it, but it is not that easy to get rid of something which is deep in your mind...

Mmm. A man is vulnerable during sex as well as the woman. As far as emotion, both can be deeply hurt. And as for physical, while the woman is being penetrated in PiV in typical cishet setups, the man can still be injured if she wanted to... and with woman on top position his consent can be easily violated. 

 

But when it all comes together and trust is given and everything is respected and it's a nice safe bubble of connection and shared pleasure and desire, the vulnerability is rather nice. You are revealing yourself to a partner in such a personal way and safe to do so.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having somewhat of an eureka moment in this thread.

 

It's occurring to me that a very likely reason/contributor to not really being able to get that whole "vulnerable (but safe)" feeling from sexual interactions that people seem to find desirable is because... I don't feel particularly attached to my body or particularly care how "vulnerable" it is.  Which kind of falls in line with a number of trans experiences I've witnessed who've encountered sexual difficulties as a result of their trans-ness (including how this issue tends to resolve itself once/if they do start to feel more comfortable with their bodies, such as following physical transition).

 

I know I *can* get that feeling, because I have/do through other forms of emotional intimacy -- it's just that it seems sex isn't and hasn't ever been one of the ways I go about it.  And as a result of the above combined with being (as far as I can tell) agender, I also get the feeling it won't ever be one of the ways I go about it, either.

 

Different strokes for different folks, as the song goes.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

There was another thread I've contributed in recently where someone was essentially asking me, "what makes you "agender" instead of "cis" if you still more or less socially identify based on your birth sex?" Well, here's one of the big reasons.  It isn't just all about pronouns, people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering the exact same thing.

But you know when people love each other they feel the need to have sex with each other. Because that’s love to them and they feel attracted to each other. And most people see it as normal. But i can’t see what’s normal i mean just because we don’t want to have sex doesn't mean that we’re mentally ill or sad or anything like this. That’s why i hate when people say that sex is healthy and that you can’t live without it. LIKE COME ON, VEGETABLES AND  EXERCISING ARE HEALTHIER THAN ANYTHING ELSE! And how many people are dead because they didn’t had sex? Like calm down people can’t we just be ourselves?

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

It's occurring to me that a very likely reason/contributor to not really being able to get that whole "vulnerable (but safe)" feeling from sexual interactions that people seem to find desirable is because... I don't feel particularly attached to my body or particularly care how "vulnerable" it is.

That’s a very interesting point.  When I think about vulnerability I’m strictly considering emotional risk... or perhaps financial/reputation risk in an identity theft sense.  As long as no one kills it slowly and painfully I don’t particular care about my body or its potential vulnerability either.  Huh.

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

That’s why i hate when people say that sex is healthy and that you can’t live without it.

It's completely valid for someone to say that they can't live without sex, and it's fine for them to say they can't imagine otherwise, as long as they acknowledge that it's not the same for everyone (especially asexuals). I think a lot of the frustration/misunderstanding comes from people using stronger language than they mean. Someone who says people in general can't live without sex might mean people on average can't live without sex, which may be to some degree correct. 

 

I think we just need to respect that in most cases, people will know their own wants and needs better than other people. I don't want or need sex, for my physical or mental well-being, and nobody should tell me otherwise. Some people might need sex for their physical or mental well-being, and I'm not going to correct them. I think it's more often about the habit to use absolute language than it is actual views people hold. 

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

People shouldn't be forcing the idea that sex is vital on anyone who's asexual, but for most of us it is healthy. It's a significant plus for my psychological health (as are other things, too).

*nods*

 

I see it more like certain foods... healthy for people who don’t have a negative reaction to it.  I know that’s an oversimplification, but plenty of otherwise healthy things are not healthy to those with allergies or sensitivities.  One could even argue that intensely disliking a food, so much that being made to eat it is really stressful, outweighs its benefits.  In the broad sense that food is still healthy, though.  Saying peanuts are healthy is not a slam on kids with peanut-induced anaphylaxis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Snao Cone said:

It's completely valid for someone to say that they can't live without sex, and it's fine for them to say they can't imagine otherwise, as long as they acknowledge that it's not the same for everyone (especially asexuals). I think a lot of the frustration/misunderstanding comes from people using stronger language than they mean. Someone who says people in general can't live without sex might mean people on average can't live without sex, which may be to some degree correct. 

 

I think we just need to respect that in most cases, people will know their own wants and needs better than other people. I don't want or need sex, for my physical or mental well-being, and nobody should tell me otherwise. Some people might need sex for their physical or mental well-being, and I'm not going to correct them. I think it's more often about the habit to use absolute language than it is actual views people hold. 

All of this!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's completely valid for someone to say that they can't live without sex, and it's fine for them to say they can't imagine otherwise, as long as they acknowledge that it's not the same for everyone (especially asexuals).

The problem is, the people who say these things rarely do that.

 

Just yesterday (on a totally different forum, one for video games even, so it wasn't even on-topic) I got to listen to someone blab about how everyone wants to be in a relationship and the only people that claim they don't are in one of 3 boats: they are either struggling to find one, have gotten burned by one before and are suffering trauma from it, or they are a psychopath.  (I'm sure their views on sex wouldn't be much different from that.)  Sure, I get that there are probably more people like this on the internet specifically because of the veil of anonymity that keeps people from punching them in the face for being an ignorant intolerant twat, but it does extend offline to some extent too.

 

I don't really care if someone thinks they can't live without sex.  I still think they're probably wrong and are engaging in exaggeration -- in much the same way that I'd think an 8 year old potentially engaging in melodramatics and proclaiming that "their life is over" when they get grounded for a week is probably wrong -- but ultimately I'm not going to care that much if they are just speaking for themselves.  But some (most?) people literally can't seem to fathom someone not being into the same things they are, and that's when I start taking issue.  I see this sort of thing going on with all sorts of mundane crap.  Food preferences, music preferences, hobbies... you name it.

 

People painting themselves with broad strokes like this is precisely why asexuality has the reputation of being the "invisible orientation".

 

I'm on the autism spectrum (one potential known quality of which is that they can have difficulty with recognizing that others don't always share the sometimes very niche interests they do), and sometimes I think even I have a better handle on this shit that some "neurotypical" people do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus the Fox

It’s perhaps one of those things that it’s rarely ever adequately explained properly at any point to cover the broadest spectrum of experiences to most asexuals.  Like sex-ed is still useless other than ‘you know when you start feeling it’

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

Or mid-30-somethings. :P (I have a goddamn anaphylactic nut allergy. So does my cousin who's in her 50s, actually.)

Totally agreed.  It most often seems to be the parents of allergic kids who react negatively to broad peanut statements but the older allergic are out there too.  :)

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

But some (most?) people literally can't seem to fathom someone not being into the same things they are, and that's when I start taking issue.

I hate it when people are like that. I like to assume that most folks aren't, but maybe I don't interact deeply with a wide enough range of people to get a sense of how many are like that. My family aren't like that. It doesn't come up in my work environment. Most of my social interaction doesn't get to that kind of conversation. And I'm too tired to interact with people in other ways. I'm sure if I actually paid attention to Facebook, or even took part in another forum, I'd see more of this kind of attitude...but I'm not inclined to look for it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :P

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

That's how I learnt to be ashamed as a child of all my interests that weren't the same as my dad's, and to hide them.

I felt this a lot too, but more from peers in school than family members. It is such a negative situation to be in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Snao Cone said:

I felt this a lot too, but more from peers in school than family members. It is such a negative situation to be in. 

So same, from both.

 

Out in the adult world - and I see it often - it seems to be a mix of genuine enthusiasm (I love this so much!  Everyone else loves it too, or somehow doesn’t know about it yet!) and reverse othering (people like me don’t feel that way, and you seem like me, so you don’t feel that way).

 

The former is well-intentioned...

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

I've never really understood getting caught up in things like that. Everyone loving or hating whatever, judging people for shit. I dunno. I just do my own thing and connect with the people I can share stuff with and that's all that matters because that's what's ultimately meaningful.

Agreed.  I do get where @Philip027 might be coming from, though, because it gets old when you’re exposed to it regularly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2020 at 9:15 AM, Philip027 said:

I'm having somewhat of an eureka moment in this thread.

 

It's occurring to me that a very likely reason/contributor to not really being able to get that whole "vulnerable (but safe)" feeling from sexual interactions that people seem to find desirable is because... I don't feel particularly attached to my body or particularly care how "vulnerable" it is.  Which kind of falls in line with a number of trans experiences I've witnessed who've encountered sexual difficulties as a result of their trans-ness (including how this issue tends to resolve itself once/if they do start to feel more comfortable with their bodies, such as following physical transition).

 

I know I *can* get that feeling, because I have/do through other forms of emotional intimacy -- it's just that it seems sex isn't and hasn't ever been one of the ways I go about it.  And as a result of the above combined with being (as far as I can tell) agender, I also get the feeling it won't ever be one of the ways I go about it, either.

 

Different strokes for different folks, as the song goes.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

There was another thread I've contributed in recently where someone was essentially asking me, "what makes you "agender" instead of "cis" if you still more or less socially identify based on your birth sex?" Well, here's one of the big reasons.  It isn't just all about pronouns, people.

Wow! This is exactly how I feel. I had thought I might be trans for a while, but now I understand that I just don't really care that much about my gender nor my physical form.

 

I DO crave emotional intimacy, but I would never equate physical/sexual vulnerability with emotional dependence!

 

For me, I feel close to people when I share a common struggle, like OCD, and maybe a common interest.

 

To me, a serious conversation is far more intimate than sex, which seems like a rather rudimentary form of connection even animals engage in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, twetzel59 said:

To me, a serious conversation is far more intimate than sex, which seems like a rather rudimentary form of connection even animals engage in.

The vast majority of interactions you will have your partner, indeed anyone, will be "rudimentary". That's just life. You can feel love and connectedness washing the dishes with the right person!!! Sex just happens to be more fun. 😃

 

This thread has been an enjoyable read.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2020 at 4:21 PM, BeakLove said:

The vast majority of interactions you will have your partner, indeed anyone, will be "rudimentary". That's just life. You can feel love and connectedness washing the dishes with the right person!!! Sex just happens to be more fun. 😃

 

This thread has been an enjoyable read.

Haha.

 

I think sex is more rudimentary than washing dishes, but I do see your point. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2020 at 3:50 PM, CBC said:

Not that people don't have casual sex -- they do -- but individuals in a loving, connected relationship are having sex for far more reasons, and far more nuanced and complex reasons, than a pair of cheetahs going at it in the African savannah.

Acknowledged, but do you think that sex is mostly a biological drive? I always thought that people would eventually tire of physical intimacy and rely on emotional connection instead. But, my ace experiences may be biased ofc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2020 at 12:55 PM, Philip027 said:

The problem is, the people who say these things rarely do that.

 

Just yesterday (on a totally different forum, one for video games even, so it wasn't even on-topic) I got to listen to someone blab about how everyone wants to be in a relationship and the only people that claim they don't are in one of 3 boats: they are either struggling to find one, have gotten burned by one before and are suffering trauma from it, or they are a psychopath.  (I'm sure their views on sex wouldn't be much different from that.)  Sure, I get that there are probably more people like this on the internet specifically because of the veil of anonymity that keeps people from punching them in the face for being an ignorant intolerant twat, but it does extend offline to some extent too.

 

I don't really care if someone thinks they can't live without sex.  I still think they're probably wrong and are engaging in exaggeration -- in much the same way that I'd think an 8 year old potentially engaging in melodramatics and proclaiming that "their life is over" when they get grounded for a week is probably wrong -- but ultimately I'm not going to care that much if they are just speaking for themselves.  But some (most?) people literally can't seem to fathom someone not being into the same things they are, and that's when I start taking issue.  I see this sort of thing going on with all sorts of mundane crap.  Food preferences, music preferences, hobbies... you name it.

 

People painting themselves with broad strokes like this is precisely why asexuality has the reputation of being the "invisible orientation".

 

I'm on the autism spectrum (one potential known quality of which is that they can have difficulty with recognizing that others don't always share the sometimes very niche interests they do), and sometimes I think even I have a better handle on this shit that some "neurotypical" people do.

Nothing like good old-fashioned stupid ignorant people who think the world revolves around them and expect everyone to conform to THEIR way. That sums up the people you were describing Philip027. Sex and relationships are not essentials like food, water, and oxygen. These people just can't get that through their thick skulls. They are mentally handicapped for sure. They're the ones with the hangup not us. 

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

Nothing like good old-fashioned stupid ignorant people who think the world revolves around them and expect everyone to conform to THEIR way. That sums up the people you were describing Philip027. Sex and relationships are not essentials like food, water, and oxygen. These people just can't get that through their thick skulls. They are mentally handicapped for sure. They're the ones with the hangup not us. 

Hey, just a question, but...do you ever think you're overdoing it with this interpretation of other people? Like, do you understand what your own projections onto them are? That's the issue you're criticizing in them, and it seems that you just want to spit it back at them. 

 

Plus, you're implying that thick skulls are related to sexuality, and I object to that because I'm asexual and have an EXTREMELY thick skull. Thick like you wouldn't believe. Immense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, acematt said:

Sex and relationships are not essentials like food, water, and oxygen. These people just can't get that through their thick skulls. They are mentally handicapped for sure. They're the ones with the hangup not us. 

I've seen this view expressed a few times on here (though not quite so hyperbolic). Surely though, this is an argument for not being invested in anything? Why care about getting better at your art, doing well at your job, finishing that book, having any friends? Although, actually, if you want to reduce the human experience to biological imperatives then surely satiating sexual drive would be one of them, no?

 

All that said, I can actually sympathise a little bit with the exasperation in the original post. People do often talk about their sex and love lives in rather hackneyed ways that come off as insincere. But I do think when they say they're missing something, they are getting at something real. I think most everyone in this world yearns for some sense of connection to others and a romantic partnership with someone you love is the context which permits access the fullest range and depth of human intimacy. And yes, for many people an important element of that connection is sexual. Our sexual proclivities are part of our personality like anything else, and finding someone with whom that can be shared in a loving context, is not trivial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snao Cone said:

Plus, you're implying that thick skulls are related to sexuality, and I object to that because I'm asexual and have an EXTREMELY thick skull. Thick like you wouldn't believe. Immense. 

To paraphrase Mr. Sulu, and do a little word-mangling of my own, "Try to match wits with Snao Job, she'll cut you to pieces every time". :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sex is complicated, and it's used as a tool in a lot of negative ways: seduction to manipulate, coercion to control, or shame to blackmail, to name a few. It's also used as a system of measurement to determine pecking order, especially among younger age groups. This can leave a bad taste in the mouth of a person who wants nothing to do with it. 

 

But jfc, it doesn't take much to understand the ways it's good and healthy and loving. It doesn't take much to rationally comprehend why sex can mean so much to people who have a need inside themselves. It's very irrational to insist that anything besides food, water, and oxygen is shallow and meaningless and anyone who likes corporeal pleasures of this worldly existence is stupid and shallow and impure. Call me stupid, shallow, and impure for getting joy out of watching dogs play in the snow. Berate me for the time I spend under a blanket. Accuse me of ignorance for liking macaroni and cheese. These are physical and emotional pleasures I take part in to seek fulfillment. They aren't on a higher plane because they're not involving sex. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s nor really that different than someone saying “I’d die if I had to give up my dogs!” or “You’re gluten-intolerant??  How awful!  It would kill me to give up pasta!”

 

Would they *literally* die?  Of course not.  It’s one way people express “this is really important to me and my life (and potentially mental health) would suffer a significant blow if I had to give it up.”

 

But people don’t normally jump all over those who “would die without” sports, or pets, or coffee, or movies, or concerts, or nature, or food.  They either nod in agreement or (figuratively or literally) roll their eyes.  No need to react differently to “dying without” sexual contact...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...