This asexual is 25/male, virgin, doesnt get horny and proud

[M51]

3. I teach abstinence and applaud those who have the willpower to abstain. This is a nonissue for asexuals as they are automatically turned off.

Choose Abstinence, looking at a number of your posts here and on other threads, I keep wondering if you are confused about what asexuality is. Asexuality is not automatic abstinence. Abstinence does not mean you are asexual. Lots of asexuals do not choose abstinence at all. Asexuals can and do have sex, all the time, for a variety of social reasons. They simply do not feel the physiological urge to have sex. They do it for other reasons, some of which are very valid and understandable.

In many cases, asexuals have sex because they are confused, or because they think something is wrong with them that having sex will cure. In these cases, sex education is just as important for asexuals as it is for sexuals. Possibly even more so - because I had no interest in sex in high school, I pretty much tuned out the sex education. I honestly can't remember anything I was "taught" about sex in school, because I didn't care. Then suddenly I hit the adult world and am getting all this pressure from men I think I care about and I know NOTHING about the various risks and options...not a good combo.

I personally believe that demonizing sex and sexuality is the primary cause of negative/hurtful sex. I believe that people associate pain or degradation with sex because of attitudes that demonize sex. If we were all encouraged to responsibly explore our sexuality, and accepted no matter what our sexual preference, I think there would be a lot less hurtful sex out there. For one thing, we would associate responsiblity with sexual pleasure, rather than shame and taboo. STDs would be less of an issue because people would have a more responsible approach to sex, and would better understand and control the impulses that lead to unsafe sex. Actually I think there would be less sex, period, because I think a lot of sex these days is a bandaid for stunted or repressed emotional needs. In my opinion preaching abstinence only exacerbates the ignorance, taboo, and irresponsibility currently dominating our attitudes about sex.

Anyways, I don't mean any of this to be hostile. Just my observations.

[Amcan]

I echo M51. Asexuals are perfectly capabale of sex nad some have indeed enjoyed sex. Asexuals can have a sex drive nad experience sexual arousal. What they don't exoerience is sexual attraction adn the desire to have sex with another person.

Asexuals are diverse, some have a sex drive, some don't.

Either way lack of sexual attraction is not abstinence.

[bbctv]

also, asexuality, and even being rather repulsed by sexuality, does not mean you necessarily think sex is gross in a "it should be eradicated" sort of way. i mean, many people find the sight of blood gross or it causes them to recoil or aversion, but they don't think BLOOD is gross, they just don't like to see it drip. when most asexual people say they are repulsed, i think they sort of speak for themselves and not for others.

i think sex can be an incredibly meaningful experience, and it gives many people incredibly profound joy. i've probably said this before, but as anyone can tell from my signature i read a lot. i spend a lot of time talking to women about literature, hoping to find someone who's into the same things as me or who's read something i wish i'd have. lots of people would call this pretentious, but that's an opinion; they don't have a right to argue that the human species should collectively decide not to allow people to bond this way, in the same way nobody should decide that sex is to trivial a way to bond.

the idea that we should be abstinent because sex has risks, and that lifelong monogamy minimizes those risks, but that on top of that you still act like it is IN AND OF ITSELF something of a contagion would really cause a lot of people a lot of grief. many people practice premarital chastity because they think sex is something GREAT and TOO SPECIAL to share with anyone but your one true love. that may sound naive, but i can at least see that as a valid viewpoint, but that's something that is related to someone's convictions and beliefs, not something schools should be teaching. it says sex is a big deal, but it's good, and i'm waiting for my soul mate. o.k., but schools should just be teaching basic facts about sex, about what you should do to minimize risks. it can talk about different views about sexuality, and perhaps our schools don't do this and should, but they shouldn't be arguing for or against any particular policy, any more than your high school civics class should be telling you who to vote for; it should just tell you about how the government works.

the family, or some sort of organization independent from the state should be informing the values of young people, and young people's critical intelligence should be respected, and they should examine the views in the world around them. should high school kids have sex? well, i don't think so, but many will, and i don't think anything will stop them. letting state schools teach values is, i think, overstepping their authority.

also, of all authorities, the one kids usually resent the most is school. kids love to rebel against school, so if schools start advocating a policy, it will likely backfire simply because kids hate school and everything it stands for.

[choose_abstinence]

davidrugova, You have the right to disagree with my opinion. Sorry if you had to get offended at opinions. I don't purposely try to offend people but this inadventurally happens. As for mating to bond, I heard of some people doing that while for others, mating breaks relationships. I bond in other ways. Platonic by definition means love focused on the beauty of a person's character and intelligence rather than on their physical charms. Platonic love in its modern popular sense is an affectionate relationship into which the sexual element does not enter, especially in cases where one might easily assume otherwise. A simple example of platonic relationships is a deep, non-sexual friendship between two heterosexual people of the opposite sexes.(see wikipedia)

Another definition: 1. A pure, spiritual affection, subsisting between persons of opposite sex, unmixed with carnal desires, and regarding the mind only and its excellences; -- a species of love for which Plato was a warm advocate.

To avoid risk of offending you again, I won't comment further on your relationship, I only want to show my understanding for the definition of platonic love. I have experienced it many times and its a high level form of relationship. Thats not to say low level romance is bad, I feel its important to have some physical affection such as cuddling to bond a relationship. But if she isn't interested in any aspect, I will respect this.

Whats your opinion of platonic love which is a type of love?

Blood being gross depends on what is bleeding and how much. When I got blood drawn for the test, the needle scared me more than the blood. Bodily functions can be gross depends on opinion. Fact is everyone uses the bathroom when nature calls and im so used to it that there is no bother. There is plenty I find gross about mating and besides mating has no relevence to me and my life. My privates are also private, something we agree 8)

The meaning of a scented candle is to not only neaturalize malodors but to replace them with fragences that make me and my nose smile. You will probably mention the risk of fire. That is correct and im very careful and don't consider it a significent risk unlike mating. You are entitled to what pleasures you seek in mating. I could say the same for cuddling and I feel that I can achieve all the neccessary pleasures by cuddling without the risks of mating.

If you consider mating so risky, even in marriage, would you then be in agreement why I believe mating should only be done for procreation? As for causal mating, your asking for diseases and unwanted pregnancy. We should follow animals in other things than procreational mating. Animals don't start wars or commit inhuman crimes. We need to properly utilize our intellegence and make the right choices in life. Ideals are guidelines to help us make the right choices.

If you have good articles on why some humans recreationally mate that I wouldn't find offensive, please PM me the links.

Why do thousands of people countinue to contact venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancy, physical and emotional injuries? Too many irresponsable people and even those using protection should know that it can backfire and I know many cases where it does and they end up in trouble in everyway. Why are so many willing to take all those risks? This is something I still don't understand and am shocked. What is wrong with the alternatives, especially cuddling? Are they saying cuddling is not "good" enough? :shock: :evil:

Lunamoth, its true that guys usually initite the mating encounter. Most of the time, it's not the right time for mating to occur. In fact I believe the only right time is when procreation is desired, that's my opinion. Don't you think a hug is so much safer than mating? You stand correct, I consider mating nasty but that is my opinion and others feel the opposite. Sticking to facts, no one can argue there is none of the risks with cuddling as there is with mating.

m51, if asexuals don't have the urge nor interest, why do something you don't like? Especially considering the risks. No one can make me bungee jump for example. There is nothing wrong with asexuals. I am told this all the time and that I need to get "laid" to be cured. I just laugh or ignore them as they couldn't be more wrong. Just as you can't cure a homosexual into mating the opposite gender, you can't cure an asexual into mating either gender. As for abstinence ed, I found it very informative. In my opinion(and facts) and from what I learned, everyone should know that abstinence is the only 100% safe method. If somebody wanted to get physical, could cuddling or kissing take place? Perhaps even mast*****ion and using your fantasties to take you anywhere you want. For emotional support, just be there for each other in person.

Mark, you are welcome to chat to me whenever you have the time. My AIM screename is public. Thanks for your kind words, sir.

[Mark from the OCD board]

A simple example of platonic relationships is a deep, non-sexual friendship between two heterosexual people of the opposite sexes.(see wikipedia)

Another definition: 1. A pure, spiritual affection, subsisting between persons of opposite sex, unmixed with carnal desires, and regarding the mind only and its excellences; -- a species of love for which Plato was a warm advocate.

This is a very beautiful form of love, one I experience as well. My best friend, also a gay sexual male, is someone I have been attracted to since we met fifteen years ago. When we met, he was recently out of the closet and a virgin; he needed a more-experienced friend more than he did a lover.

I can tell you that I would have had sex with him had he wanted to... Maybe we would have bonded because of it or maybe we would have grown apart. That is always the risk with sex, one we sexuals know we have to take.

But... By the time he was ready to have sex, we were like brothers and I knew I could not hit on him. He started dating and sometimes having sex with others--and he has been sexually mongamous with his lover since 1999. In fact, when he first got together with his lover, people began consoling me. Since he and I are so close, they assumed that we were lovers who had broken up.

At any rate, our friendship is completely non-sexual, but I treasure it all the same. Not being able to have sex with him does not stop me from being on Cloud Nine if, say, we should have our arms around each other's shoulders. It also does not stop me from smiling, as I am doing right now, simply because I am writing about him.

Earlier in our friendship, I helped him a lot. Then, when I started experiencing bad OCD (before I learned to control it), he was the one who was there for me.

I say all this to make it clear that I know where you are coming from when you talk about platonic love--but also to make it clear that I am a sexual with sexual desires. Much as I would like to falsely claim otherwise, I can have this sort of relationship with my best friend because I have other outlets for my sexuality.

I could never contemplate living the rest of my life without sex. I'd sooner slit my wrists. A life without sex is, for me, like a life lived in black and white instead of color, like a diet of stale bread when everyone else has chocolate.

That's how much sex means to me. I fully respect people who are asexual, people who choose abstinence (like another gay friend of mine--more than a decade in his case), and sexuals who desire others but do not desire me. There is nothing wrong with any of that.

Why do thousands of people countinue to contact venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancy, physical and emotional injuries? Too many irresponsable people and even those using protection should know that it can backfire and I know many cases where it does and they end up in trouble in everyway. Why are so many willing to take all those risks? This is something I still don't understand and am shocked. What is wrong with the alternatives, especially cuddling? Are they saying cuddling is not "good" enough? :shock: :evil:

I am not saying that it is not "good" enough for me. I am saying instead that, because of who I am, it is not enough for me. Let me explain...

Cuddling is wonderful. I can and have cuddled with no sex expected, and I love it. But... If you are talking about my primary relationship with a man, I honestly don't think I could live on cuddles alone. My wiring is not your wiring.

Also, I know that I need my sexuality in order to keep my OCD at bay. Sex relaxes me, makes me feel good about myself, makes me feel loved, makes all my real-life and OCD issues seem less important. If I were celibate, it would be much harder for me to control my OCD. Remember that I now take only 25% of the dosage of OCD medication I once needed--and that one daily pill is the only medication I take for anything. That is how much control I now have.

The type of love you describe is very, very beautiful--but also very, very idealistic. Idealism, especially in the young, worries me, as it can lead to a crash that produces a cynical, unhappy older person. I talk to a lot of young gays who are just out, as well as a lot of young heterosexuals with OCD. The idealism they express is not something that exists in reality, and they have to set their sites lower if they don't want to join the ranks of the lonely and disillusioned.

I see the possibility of your getting badly hurt because of your beliefs if you don't reflect on how extreme they are. Please, for your sake, don't assume that people are wretched or depraved if they need sex in their lives and cannot possibly be celibate. There are indeed wonderful asexuals out there, and there are indeed sexuals for whom celibacy is an option. May you find one! But that person may have other issues, and even if there is no sex involved, her love (or even yours) may still fall short of your expectations. Also, don't automatically dismiss a woman who is really good for you if she needs sex. It would be like my dismissing asexuals automatically because they don't want sex. In both cases, it is a value judgment, an assumption that the other person is less of a person. "Life is a series of compromises."

I am told this all the time and that I need to get "laid" to be cured.

This is ignorance on the part of the people who say it--and for the very reasons you mentioned.

Mark, you are welcome to chat to me whenever you have the time. My AIM screename is public. Thanks for your kind words, sir.

My pleasure. I have been mentally abused by a number of people in my life, and I don't like to see people treated like pariahs.

Since I am a gay man and an atheist, I have to keep my screen name private. Otherwise, gung-ho Christians will bombard me with messages about how I am supposedly going to hell unless I become celibate or heterosexual (or both) and how I have to return to the church. (I am an ex-Christian Fundamentalist.) This has been a problem in the past, and it is the reason I gave up AIM.

This is also the reason the idea of celibacy and/or ex-gay movements is such a no go for me. Been there, done that.

I am Christian-friendly (in case you are a Christian), and I have more Christian friends and relatives than atheist, agnostic, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist friends and relatives combined. It is the holier than thou and those who would preach to me that I cannot tolerate.

I do have a screen name through my MSN Hotmail account, and if you can access such IMs I will send the name to you through a private message. Let me know. There are very few people who contact me that way: My best friend, my friend in Australia, and gay French speakers in Cannes and Paris with whom I practice the language. (I also speak Italian and would love to IM native speakers in that language as well.)

Actually, one of the guys in Cannes helped me download and install the the MSN Hotmail Instant Message program by talking me through it via e-mail. The only problem is he sent me the French version. While my French is good, all the instructions and help pages are in very technical French that is often difficult for me.

It is sometimes hard to find me on line, as I do the bulk of my personal e-mail exchanges and message board posting at work, where I cannot run Instant Messages. My apartment is in the same neighborhood as my parents' house (the house I grew up in), and I am there several times a week to help them with various things or visit them, my sister, and the cat. Sometimes I do work for my father on his computer, and then I post my own stuff from there as well. His computer is too outdated to run Instant Messages properly, though. Thus, the only place I can run them is here in my apartment, on my computer.

Well, it is waaaaaaay past my bedtime and I have to teach in the morning, so I'd best end this message even though I have many more things to say. :)

[Mark from the OCD board]

WARNING: THERE BE SEX HERE! THOU MAYEST SKIP MINE POST IF THOU ART SO INCLINED.

I debated whether of not to include this in my message two days ago, and now I think my leaving it out is silly. Besides, I've posted a warning for those who don't share my love for this type of information...

Again, I love all the beautiful things you say about Platonic love; however, its original Greek advocates may or may not have had other things in mind. Platonic love was male-male in Athenian circles, as women were seen as the embodiment of sexuality and vice--insane creatures that drove men wild. (That is NOT my view; I am just stating what the Greeks believed. What they actually practiced is another matter entirely.)

Roman women were visible and powerful in all aspects of Roman society, particularly in public life, but a virtuous Greek woman was supposed to have very pale skin since she was never outdoors long enough to get a suntan--or was wrapped up like a modern Muslim if she were. Young virgins, slaves, sex workers, and women with poor reputations were the only women you expected to see in public.

This is ideal Greek thought, however, and, again, what actually happened on a daily basis may or may not have matched the philosophical ideal. In addition, some city-states, particularly Sparta, did not hold the same values (although there are some who argue for the "army of lovers"--as in male lovers--concept of Sparta.)

I am only a layman, although a very interested and well read one, when it comes to the ancient world. I cannot approach this as a scholar, nor can I say that what I write contains no errors simply because I write it. I do not think I am in error, but I am not, after all, an ancient Greek.

Back to fear of ancient women's sexuality... The belief goes back even further. For example, in the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, close friends Gilgamesh and Enkidu, both males, sleep in each other's arms without any sexual implications. (Granted, some gay scholars interpret that another way, and they may or may not be right.) Enkidu, formerly a wild man, is seduced by Shamat, a woman who serves as a holy temple harlot. After six or seven days of wild, orgiastic sex with her, Enkidu loses his savage strength and freedom but gains knowledge of civilization. Towards the end of the epic, when Enkidu is near death (for a variety of reasons too complicated to post here), he curses Shamat for civilizing him. Sex and pastroal life were his through Shamat, but love in friendship was his through Gilgamesh.

Interestingly, he could only be Gilgamesh's friend after he was seduced by Shamat--after he had experienced sex and become civilized. In other words, after he was on the road to death. (In older forms of French, an orgasm was called la petite mort or le petit mort--the little death. Similar concept. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_petite_mort)

Back to Athens... True, proper Athenians may have rejected anal intercourse between men (officially, although not always in practice), but they did (supposedly) practice frontal sexual love. Their Platonic love could have had sexual ramifications that are not implied in the term today. (How you are told to read this depends on which scholar is writing about it or teaching you. Asexual scholars and gay scholars may be in conflict here.)

Among some modern gays, Platonic love is a double entendre, and Plato himself may have gotten it from Socrates when he was a beloved schoolboy and given it to Aristotle when he was a beloved schoolmaster. Was it ideal mental love with nothing physical, frontal sex only, or full anal intercourse? Again, it depends on the scholar.

Aristotle then went on to be Alexander's schoolmaster, and we KNOW about Alexander's sexual tastes...

[choose_abstinence]

Thanks for the long posts. I read them several times and thought carefully how to address your posts. I think your a great guy with lots of interesting things to say :) Maybe one day we can meet in person?

1. I agree it isn't right to 4th base someone you have come to think as brothers. This would change the whole foundation of a relationship and probably for the worse.

2. Again you stand correct and I agree that a platonic friendship can be wonderful and make you feel like on a cloud 8)

3. With your need for a sexual outlet, once you have a partner, you can have a platonic relationship with anyone else. Those that are asexual, is platonic relationships the only outlet they need?

4. I respect your homosexuality. I even respect other sexuals. What I don't respect is immature people who aren't ready and they get pregnant or STDs. Yes I still think it is gross and will have nothing to do with it, what you two do is your business alone. I talk about abstinence so 4th base can be special with the right person at the right time. Personally, it means nothing to me but I reconize it has meaning to others.

5. I also have OCD, sometimes I may repeat words or actions. I don't feel I need any medicine as OCD isn't controlling my life, it's just an inconvinence at times.

6. You think platonic love is idealistic? How is that bad?

7. Lots of sexuals are able to abstain or be celebate. You have to agree this eliminates the worry of STDS, pregnancy, hurt emotions, broken relationships, physical injury, social outcast, religious sins, etc. Rather than abstain for life, sexuals should wait till the time is right and mate with the right person. It upsets me that the great majority are irresponsable.

8. If my future girlfriend wanted ***, she would have to be celebate anyway because not only am I uninterested, I find *** gross, dirty, scary, repulsive and dangerous. If she wants to dump me because of that, she has the right to.

9. Thanks again for everything you said. I wish more people would be as understanding as you are. In another thread, several people called me "troll" which could be a personal attack. :evil:

[Kawaii_Neko]

choose_abstinence, I've read through some of your posts and the posts on this thread and you mention how you've been called names and whatnot and my only comment (and I am not trying to offend) is that you've come across as rather agressive at times. Especially when you're refering to sexuals. While I can understand your frustration with the lack of planning and thought that some people put into the acts they do, you often seem as though you're attacking when there is no real reason to. I think it's wonderful that you're a supporter of abstinence between sexual couples, but many sexuals do not follow the same rule of thought. So unless you suddenly have the power to control others thoughts, attacking or insulting the sexual population isn't going to encourage them to your point of view.

^_^

[Mark from the OCD board]

Hey there, choose_abstinence!

I think Kawaii_Neko gave you some good advice. Please... Read her words with an open mind. :)

About your OCD... Yeah, I kinda knew that. :) It takes one to know one.

Remember that like asexuals or people with Asperger's, for example, the way we OCD people see the world is not the way the non-OCD population sees it. We OCD folks are logical to a flaw, and our solutions to many of the world's ills would be perfect if only we did not forget to factor in human needs and emotions. I say "we" here since I have had to learn to do that and often have to remind myself of it.

I never fail to be empathetic in the classroom, as that is how I have allowed myself to be trained in working with students. The key here is training. In the past, though, I was a totally different person in my real life and alienated many people. Now I strive to be classroom Mark even outside the classroom--and, in fact, classroom Mark is what you see on this board.

I post this here because I want people to see it; let them know what OCD is. I don't want you to be shunned because you see the world through OCD lens. (Please do not be offended, but to some extent you do, bro. That does not mean all your points are wrong; it just means some may go too far. Still, you are to be commended for your integrity.)

I am really upset that people have called you a troll. I do understand it, though, as non-OCD people often do not get the way we think (just as non-asexuals and non-Asperger's...)

I am not going to say anything else about it here, but I would be more than happy to discuss OCD with you by e-mail or private message. (I would also be happy to discuss topics of mutual interest.) As I mentioned, I do not have AIM. I do have MSN hotmail instant messages, however, but I do not post my screen name for reasons mentioned in an earlier post. If you have the same type of service, I will gladly PM you my screen name--or my e-mail address.

As for meeting in person... I have no problem with meeting new folks, but before either of us expresses interest in meeting we should first see how we get along in print. :)

Some other comments:

3. With your need for a sexual outlet, once you have a partner, you can have a platonic relationship with anyone else. Those that are asexual, is platonic relationships the only outlet they need?

Sentence one: Absolutely. Actually, I already have and love Platonic relationships, but it is hard for me since I am currently single and have been for a while. In other words, I have not had sex in a while and am NOT happy about it. If it were not for masturbation, I would probably do something stupid.

Platonic friendships are a lot easier when I also have a man who wants me sexually.

Sentence two: For many asexuals, Platonic friendships are enough. (At least that is what I have read here.) For others, a committed relationship, preferably without sex, is the goal. This relationship would be exclusive in most cases, although I am pretty sure that most asexuals in such relationships would also have and be loyal within Platonic friendships.

Although Platonic friendships are always helpful and desirable, I think most people who are relationship-oriented are unhappy without one even if they have many wonderful Platonic friendships. While still doing much good, sometimes good Platonic friendships also make a person sad if he or she does not have a committed relationship and wants one badly, as those relationships are almost a form of teasing oneself.

4. I respect your homosexuality. I even respect other sexuals. What I don't respect is immature people who aren't ready and they get pregnant or STDs. Yes I still think it is gross and will have nothing to do with it, what you two do is your business alone. I talk about abstinence so 4th base can be special with the right person at the right time. Personally, it means nothing to me but I reconize it has meaning to others.

Your first sentence makes me want to stand up and applaud. Many abstinence people are dead set against homosexuality and tell me I must be celibate for life or go to hell.

I don't understand, however, why you say procreation is only for having children and not for recreation if you also think that homosexuality is O.K. and you think that 4th base can be special with the right person. I agree with the latter point, but that latter point negates the first part of the sentence. I am not even talking about gay people here. As I have already written, it is unlikely that two married heterosexuals who enjoy sex will only have it if/when they want children.

I will also say this... Don't be too hard on some of the folks who go for one night stands and other semi-dangerous activities. Some people work inhuman hours and have no life outside their jobs, something not always their fault. Sex can be like overeating, as it satisfies an emotional need. Sex can make you feel on top of the world and connected, and for people in a rat race that may be all they get.

Sleeping around is not for me, but I don't condemn those who do (provided we are not talking about abusing others, having sex with minors, cheating on spouses, or being irresponsible and not practicing safer sex).

6. You think platonic love is idealistic? How is that bad?

Ideal love is a delicious thought. Here's my photo of a statue depicting idealistic love in one of the twin Royal Belgian Fine Arts Museums in Brussels (Musées royaux des Beaux-Arts de Belgique):

Of course I want that!

But... Our world is not idealistic, and many idealistic young people get disillusioned and grow up to be angry and lonely. I can read a beautiful tale from the ancient or medieval world and weep. I can look at art in a museum and be so moved that I am speechless.

Two of my favorite paintings, both of them here in New York...

Bierstadt's Storm in the Rocky Mountains, 1886, in The Brooklyn Museum:

Cot's The Storm, 1880, in The Met (The Metropolitan Museum of Art):

Also...

Fudō-Myōō (Japanese) in the Met (my photo):

The Grand-Place in Brussels (my photo):

Paris (my photo):

Ancient Egyptian art in The Met and The Brooklyn Museum (my photos):

And beautiful men...

Man oh man oh man, I looooooove all this stuff. I devour it, I breathe it, I exist through it...

But then I rejoin the real world, knowing that what I have seen or read is beautiful and expresses my strongest fantasies--but that it is not real.

Idealism is dangerous only when it is not recognized for what it is. It allows us great happiness when it is properly tamed; unfortunately, most people are not taught how to tame it. I had to learn the hard way myself, and I am lucky I did not have every drop of love drained from me.

Here's something I posted on the OCD board yesterday; it concerns idealistic love. A member's OCD was telling him that love must be absolutely flawless and that he would thus never be able to fall in love.

-----------------------------------------------------

Real love happens when it happens; it does not follow anyone's timetable. You cannot say that you will fall in love in three weeks six days four hours nine minutes and twenty-three seconds. (I am sure some OCD person somewhere does, though...)

When I talk about real love, I do not mean the nonsense you read in fairy tales, sonnets, and romance novels. I am not talking about fairy wings, choruses of angels on high, and neverending rainbows. Forget all that--and burn Romeo and Juliet unless your idea of romance is group suicide. Love is earthy, as bound to mundane tasks and everyday affairs as everything else. It has many great moments, but most of the time you barely notice it. It has more to do with mud than gold, but sometimes the mud is wonderful.

Don't seek the grandiose stuff; you will only be disappointed if you do. OCD will tell you that love is perfect or impossible. Neither is true: Perfect love is a myth; things that are real are attainable. In other words, real love--highly imperfect but possible--is out there for anyone who seeks to grab it.

Look for a real person with honest but imperfect love--someone whose love will allow him or her to overlook your flaws (and OCD!) just as you overlook his or hers.

[choose_abstinence]

1. You are saying you should try hard to impress others and not just be yourself? I do strive to make a good impression, but yet I am true to myself. My opinions and beliefs are mine and take it or leave it.

2. I indeed do go too far with some points and inadventually offend others. I was talking to two asexual females on Yahoo messenger and we pretty much agreed on every point, one in particular has everything in common that it is amazing. Our views parrallel. Whatever I say or whatever she say, the other agrees 100%! Does not make for much debate though.

3. We could talk in a chat room, perhaps use the AVEN chat and I will send you an IM thru the chat room so only the two of us know.

4. Masturbation is an outlet for those unable to do 4th base. I do not place much negetivity on this because masturbation is 100x safer, no risk for disease, pregnancy and much reduced risk for physical injury. I do consider it a gross habit, but hey if someone does it in private and keeps it to him/her self, it is not my business and not something I should worry what other's do to their own body by themselves.

5. I often ask myself why do I need a "girlfriend" is it just a lable that society places? What is the difference between a female friendship and a girlfriend to an asexual like me(hetero-romantic-driveless-repulsed-asexual) When does one become "girl/boy friend?" or is it better that I do not use that lable and instead just be platonic/romantic friends? I have cuddled, hugged, slow danced, even kissed cheek of friends. As far as relationship, how does it differ between friendship and "girlfriend" to an asexual like me? If we remain just friends, there would not be much in the way of jealousity, insecurity, controlling and we would be free to date other people and seek other platonic/romantic friendship. It is more fun that way to associate with many people instead of limiting us to each other and shutting ourselves off potentional friends.

6. I treat all sexuals equally. No orientation "must" be any more celebate than the other. It does not matter, diseases are all the same and I know plenty of heterosexuals who have ruined their lives making the wrong choice. Abstinence of course will keep you 100% safe but I will not stop you or anyone else from "getting laid" I teach/preach abstinence but the right choice is ultimately up to you and your partner. I wish them luck being safe.

7. My belief is nature made animals and humans able to mate for procreation only. Animals have a predefined mating season that occurs once or twice a year, but sometimes they may mate more to keep up their population so they don't go extinct. The male is the one with the drive and he chases the female then mates her and "next, next, next"

Human's mating season is what society and religion calls "marriage"

and most people don't condone *** out of wedlock. In some countries, this will get you in jail or even executed!

8. Because animals can have orientations, this means it is normal and natural. Whatever animals have, humans have. Anything humans do that is country to nature is an abomination. Animals don't start wars or go killing their own species(unless you are a hungry fish or insect then everything looks like food) Homosexual animals have the same urge to procreate, the only difference is no pregnancy occurs and that, my friend is the work of nature as natural population control. When an ecosystem or biome is overpopulated, more animals will be homo or asexual. Ditto goes for humans and we have been seeing a steady increase. I think the asexual population will explode. I have reason to believe the majority of women are in fact asexual and a significent percentage of men. The problem is society is so sexualized that it profoundly confuses our minds. We are "expected" to be sexual so many of us are closet asexuals who repress our lack of attraction, in some cases, also our lack of drive. Many asexuals here have done the "deed" before, but many others are still virgins, like me. I can discuss this more, it's a very interesting topic.

9. There is treatment for addictions of all sorts. No excuse to lack self control and have one night stands. Anyone can have a proper relationship if they respect the other party. Then there is always masturbation, adult toys and even real dolls to "mate" with. If a physical outlet/release is what you want, then it would not matter masturbation, adult toys and even real dolls all achieve that goal. To satisfy emotional needs, you need to interact on a higher level mentually and spiritually and that is what relationships(date, girl, boy friend) and even marriage is for.

10. Beautiful works of art with aesthetic beauty. really invokes the mind and imagination. Good usage of textures, details, patterns, shadows, geometric, etc.

11. A long commitment is not my idea, I am a loner and a free spirit. Platonic/romantic friendship suits me, not marriage.

[Clowd Cole]

Because animals can have orientations, this means it is normal and natural. Whatever animals have, humans have. Anything humans do that is country to nature is an abomination. Animals don't start wars or go killing their own species(unless you are a hungry fish or insect then everything looks like food)

Sorry to jump out unannounced, but I hate when people say that animals dont go killing their own species. Many female spiders eat the mate after pregnancy. Deer will fight other deer to the death over a mate. There are birds that will kill off young. The thing is animals kill members of there own species just as much as humans do, they just dont have swords, guns, and bombs to kill as many in one blow as we do.

Sorry, but that comment is just one of my pet-peeves. XD

[M51]

Ants and termites conduct warfare against each other, even within the same species.

But I think I adequately addressed the "recreational sex is unnatural because animals don't do it" in another thread.

[BunnyK.]

And I think many people MORE than adequately destroyed the "sex dolls are a substitute for sexual interaction with a human" in another thread, and yet that one still popped up too. :roll:

I don't know why I even keep reading c_a's replies, all he shows is stunning ignorance and no desire to correct it.

[__AJ__]

hi! :D

welcome

[Mark from the OCD board]

Hey there, choose_abstinence

Regarding some of your points...

Others have touched on the bit about animals, so I won't do so as well (save to say that I am a big fan of gay penguins and lesbian seagulls)...

1. I am not saying that people should try so hard to impress others that they fail to be themselves; however, I am saying that a person who wants to be successful, whether in business or dating, has to conform and compromise in some things. For example, I am a t-shirt and jeans guy, but I know I cannot show up at work dressed like that. Logically, what does it matter if I wear one type of clothing instead of another? I do the work, not my clothes. Nevertheless, if I want to be taken seriously, I have to dress the part even though the clothes are uncomfortable.

Free spirits can choose not to conform--and it will certainly help them produce better art. But many who don't conform pay a price.

I pay the price for supporting liberal causes in Bush's America, for example. I am called all sorts of names, told I am going to Hell, accused of hating America, accused of having had an easy life even though I have had nothing of the sort, and so on. There are even people who shun me because of my beliefs. Further, having already published a book on teaching, I am having difficulty getting number two published since my views are liberal but those who run my academic field are conservative and often do not take me seriously. After Bush won yet again, the tone of many publishers changed.

This is a price I am willing to pay. However, I have to choose my battles, and I cannot also be non-conforming in every other aspect of my life. Sometimes I have other needs, my social and sexual ones included. I cannot fight 24/7.

In addition, in a sense non-conformity does not exist. What we call non-conformity among teens or artists, for example, is just conformity to a specific brand of what is supposed to be non-conformity. Notice how non-conformists in a particular group tend to look and think the same...

2. That's absolutely wonderful. You deserve to find women who share your views.

3. Chatting with you... Sounds fine. :)

5. Hmmm... Don't take this the wrong way, but your desire to romance lotsa ladies with no commitment makes you sound (to my ears, at least) like the asexual equivalent of love 'em and leave 'em. As long as no one is deceived, I do not have a problem with that, and you can play the asexual field as much as you like. If you find like-minded women, more power to you! Just be careful, though, as someone who thinks she's fine with what you propose may fall in love with you despite herself, and continuing the chase for other asexual women may hurt her. The heart is a dangerous thing, and asexual hearts are no less dangerous.

I cannot answer your other questions, as I barely understand girlfriend/boyfriend "rules" myself. I would say, though, that the person and his or her needs are more important than the rule.

There are many romantic asexuals who want a committed relationship. Hinting that asexuals ought to have friendships alone cheapens the validity of asexual relationships.

On the other hand, as a gay man who resents it when gays feel they have to model their relationships on heterosexual ones, I fully support you in your desire to do your own thing and define your relationships on your own terms. In short, some asexuals want a committed, exclusive relationship while others do not. I suppose one could talk about polyamorous asexuality. As long as all parties consent and are honest, I see no problem.

9. People treated for addictions never lose their addictions; rather, they are always recovering--and some lapse. I know someone who goes to a Twelve Step Program for sexual addiction, and he is able to control himself most of the time because of it. But sometimes... Humans are human and never perfect. My friend needs support, not judgment.

[square peg]

In addition, in a sense non-conformity does not exist. What we call non-conformity among teens or artists, for example, is just conformity to a specific brand of what is supposed to be non-conformity. Notice how non-conformists in a particular group tend to look and think the same...

One of my lecturers tried to convince me of this recently. It disturbs me to consider it because it suggests that all self-expression is just a kind of arbitrarily pre-defined set of conventions. Jung's archetypes bother me for the same reason (as well as being scientifically dubious). I'm with Freud on this one - no created symbol, including those of clothing and music styles, is arbitrary. If not consciously, what we wear represents abstract notions just as our dream symbols do. The extent to which we paint our eyes and which colours, the height of our shoes, the level of order and symmetry in in our hairstyles, all of it means something, and due to abstract connections, not just the sub-culture conventions we're accustomed to and which apparently most people, even some creative people, are more conscious of. Our unconscious minds are smarter than we are, capable of finding interpretations and new ways of expressing notions independent of both conditioned associations (convention) and any 'genetic programming'. I think these groups you mention have usually just come to the same conclusions, are inspired by similar things and develop similar tastes. They're not conforming, just finding like-minded people. If not, I must conclude that the arts from which I love to hypothesise meanings are all meaningless cliché also. One of our ancestors was a random symbol generator or something. :(

That was a very random point at which to contribute, I'm sorry. Please continue. :)

[bbctv]

my view on the term "platonic love" is that it's something that was used in a particular social context (Mark did a good job of talking about it) and that it's usage today varies widely between people. i think most people use it to talk about having a friend of the gender they are attracted to but when a relationship will never be considered.

true, i said sex in a relationship or in a marriage can be dangerous. people do dangerous stuff because it might be a great experience. if you live taking no risks you will live a rather empty life. people say "this COULD bring us together, more likely than tear us apart." and hey, life isn't safe! if you get in a relationship even one with no sex, other people can hurt you emotionally.

also, rad idea mark, in many cultures people of the same sex sleep together or get quite affectionate, and it isn't considered sexual. like i kept trying to get through to you about my own experience with someone i was in love with DIFFERENT CULTURES HAVE DIFFERENT CONVENTIONS DEALING WITH WHAT KIND OF TOUCHING MEANS WHAT.

[bbctv]

TOTAL noncomformity does not exist, but if you aren't really part of any clique, you have some leeway with being original, but we're all to some extent products of our culture. conformity is a relative thing, but you have the whole mainstream plus established "underground" or "counterculture" things. (in high school me and my friends would wear black pants and white shirts and black ties on certain days we labeled "machine days" and would walk the halls before school as social commentary. sort of demonstrating that we were conforming, as a group, but rebelling against... something?) i mean, when i run into neo-hippies, or kids who dress stereotypically punk rock, or any other such it's really just they defected on "the mainstream" and went some other route. i'm a product of my sort of niche culture too; i only seem original and unique to people who don't realize that i could find a number of people just like me, or similar enough that i wouldn't seem unique anymore. i just drifted into certain things and found other people who had the same things in common with me. is it conformity? i don't know, i differ on people in tastes and opinions. it's more just that i've become a member of a particular culture. i think it's conformity when you aren't allowed or won't tolerate outside ideas, like if i decided to not be friends with someone because they listened to say, metal or something like that.

[bbctv]

choose_abstinence, you said "nature made humans and animals to make for procreation only." DID IT? are you a total expert on human sexuality? people have sex for many reasons because we have something that animals don't CULTURE, LANGUAGE (at least as complex as we do) and IDEAS. sex has many functions.

anything humans do contrary to nature is an abomination? is sitting in front of a computer posting on some forum "natural?" animals don't do it; we are sure much more programmed by NATURE to have sex for reasons other than procreation than we are to develop computers and the like, though i don't think you think computers are an abomination.

[square peg]

Oh yeah, that was the other thing. As I understand it, no professional biologist would tell you that nature has its own 'purpose' for life or that individual organisms or their organs have a 'purpose' to breed or do anything else. When they casually talk about the purpose of the sexual organs etc. what they really mean is the activities they are almost universally capable of and which can contribute to procreation. Not that there's some force out there called 'nature' who's designated us these abilities and cares if we 'misuse' them. This concept is born of the incomplete understanding of biological and evolutionary theory that most people have. The funny thing is, I believe that God created life, but I consider myself less superstitious than many of the atheists in my culture who would mock me for it, because using an age-old thought process more superstitious than mine, they've made Nature (which is supposed to be a term used for inevitable and recurring processes not caused by our particular species, such as the weather and evolution) their god. Well, a mysterious force that created us and deliberately guides our existence and behaviour, the norms of which we should conform to, and which simply must exist in order to explain life... what would you call it?

Anyway, that's why any argument that appeals to the authority of nature doesn't wash with me. As soon as we start arguing what is or isn't 'natural' to determine morality, we've crossed the line from science into superstition. Now that's an example of an inclination that no longer serves our species well.

By the way this isn't a criticism of anyone. Just a critique of a line of reasoning.