I am sexual, ask me questions...

[Question]

because i like answering them.

i actually came to this forum to broaden my mind to other forms of sexuality, as i am maybe the opposite of an asexual. I always seek to understand, rather than to condemn. I have a very high sex drive, am sex-positive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive), and polyamorist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory) . ive noticed some people asking questions like "what does a sex drive actually feel like" or "what is wrong with sexuals."

i also love learning about new things, as well as helping others learn. so you can ask me anything on this thread, by PM, on aim, etc.

feel free to bash me aswell, for being sexual or just for wasting space on this forum. or ask me about my views on topics like: "do you think asexuality is a product of biology, choice, fate, etc.?" I am non-judgmental and might offer you a different point of view.

you can also bash me for my hedonistic selfishness in which i make this thread, simply because i like to talk and write, and hope that i can spur further discussion.

:D

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

What does sticking one body part into another and exchanging bodily fluids have anything to do with love? This sounds like an alien movie to me. lol. :lol:

I guess it's supposed to feel good but arousal (which usually lasts only one second for me -- and is random and happens rarely) feels to me like an uncomfortable and not at all pleasant muscle spasm. :shock:

I have masturbated as an experiment and find it a lot of work and a waste of energy to get aroused more than usual. I think I have orgasmed a few times (as far as the descriptions I have been given of orgasm it seems to fit), but I just don't get why people bother to persue such a fleeting sensation when I get more pleasure from, say, writing a story.

I cannot help but think: People would kill, cheat, lie, manipulate, look like a fool, do anything just for THIS!?!?! This fleeting feeling? It just seems so . . . insane! How can people revolve their life around such an act? How can something so 'messy' and animalistic be beautiful and loving?

[l'héros]

Why do people say that sex has to be part of an adult relationship ? that if you don't want to have sex, and yet feel attraction to someone, that you're immature ? what problem is there with asexuality, that makes the thought so offensive to people ?

I don't want to bash you, and i don't think that many will.

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

There are many, many nasty STDs out there that sexuals don't seem to have a care in the world about . . . yet they seem to care AN AWFUL DAMN LOT if you haven't had sex, and treat virginity as if it is a disease!

Why do sexuals treat virginity as a disease to get rid of as quickly as possible -- or else that person is 'sick'?

It makes no sense to me. I'd think that many virgins would actually be biologically healthier than their STD-infected counterparts.

[Cygnus]

wow Question you better start answering quick or you are going to overwhelmed. lol

[Mad Larkin]

i don't see how sex can be pleasureable,i have sex in the past and found it to be a very uncomfortable exerience that i did not find pleasureable and i know i have heard all the cliche's like you obviously weren't doing it right. I guess my question is how do sexuals get pleasure from sex is purely down to the physical or is it to a degree phsycological

[LeBlanc]

I understand that the concept of sex is universally "noraml" in the majority of cultures, as far as I know. Without sex I wouldn't be here right now alive and typing this message. What I have trouble fathoming is that people think sex is the main function for a relationship to bloom. My question is why do people need sex for the relationship to mature?

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

I can only see how sex is important for humans to reproduce. And we don't really need to reproduce anymore . . . at least for quite a while (until the population goes back to what it was before the Industrial Revolution -- about 1 billion total worldwide). Right now, the human population is about 7 billion and is increasing rapidly and exponentially!

[l'héros]

I can only see how sex is important for humans to reproduce. And we don't really need to reproduce anymore . . . at least for quite a while (until the population goes back to what it was before the Industrial Revolution -- about 1 billion total worldwide). Right now, the human population is about 7 billion and is increasing rapidly and exponentially!

haha, we are the chosen ones, the solution to the problem :lol:

[homocidal_bunnie]

What does sticking one body part into another and exchanging bodily fluids have anything to do with love? This sounds like an alien movie to me. lol. :lol:

I guess it's supposed to feel good but arousal (which usually lasts only one second for me -- and is random and happens rarely) feels to me like an uncomfortable and not at all pleasant muscle spasm. :shock:

I have masturbated as an experiment and find it a lot of work and a waste of energy to get aroused more than usual. I think I have orgasmed a few times (as far as the descriptions I have been given of orgasm it seems to fit), but I just don't get why people bother to persue such a fleeting sensation when I get more pleasure from, say, writing a story.

I cannot help but think: People would kill, cheat, lie, manipulate, look like a fool, do anything just for THIS!?!?! This fleeting feeling? It just seems so . . . insane! How can people revolve their life around such an act? How can something so 'messy' and animalistic be beautiful and loving?

Nah man when we do that is't just funn :lol:

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

H_B: Wha-??? :shock:

(And your avatar is fricken HUGE! :lol: It's squishing everything to one side! I thought there was a 150x150 size limit? What's up with that? :? )

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

haha, we are the chosen ones, the solution to the problem :lol:

Haha! I wish! That would be awesome! ^^

Evolution selecting for asexuals that don't mind sex if only it's to reproduce . . . but only if it is absolutely neccessary! Brilliant! :P

[homocidal_bunnie]

H_B: Wha-??? :shock:

(And your avatar is fricken HUGE! :lol: It's squishing everything to one side! I thought there was a 150x150 size limit? What's up with that? :? )

Well See since you are asexual you don't get the feelings I get when I have sex, and also I thought about what I said when you have sex in a relationship it does affect love you must if she trusts you enough to do it.

Now I'm sorry I tried to put my regular pic up, but it wouldn't do it no other way than this

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

Trust, huh? So it's like a 'test' of how much someone 'trusts' you? :? (Still does not get it.)

I mean . . . I don't think that even if I trusted someone a lot that I'd actually *enjoy* doing that.

[homocidal_bunnie]

Trust, huh? So it's like a 'test' of how much someone 'trusts' you? :? (Still does not get it.)

and I don't get why asexual is, but that why we are talking ask me a question

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

and I don't get why asexual is, but that why we are talking ask me a question

I thought I already asked you some questions.

[homocidal_bunnie]

and I don't get why asexual is, but that why we are talking ask me a question

I thought I already asked you some questions.

My bad one question. Not entirely When you trust someone in a relationship It builds your love for them It's like say if you, and I were together and if you every trusted me enough for that It would make me happy to know that you do so I will then develope deeper feelings for you, and know that sex would not even be th reason.

[Question]

What does sticking one body part into another and exchanging bodily fluids have anything to do with love?

lets consider a caveman. (society just complicates examples). his name is bob. natural selection has rewarded the males that spread their seed the most, ie, the most sexual. bob is most undoubtedly the product of sexual parents. he too, is sexual with many partners, however, he is bound to prefer a certain female over the others. the female he spends the most time with, (likely the most beautiful, smart, healthy, strong DNA) he is bound to fall in love with. this love (evidence that suggests certain chemical aspects of love last about 2.5 years) should be long enough to keep bob monogamous while he is impregnating the female. This love is necessary to ensure that bob sticks around to care and support the baby that the female will most likely have. After 2.5 years, the male may or may not stick around, but the female no longer has the burden of nursing the baby, and so is capable of raising the child herself. however, depending on how monogamous bob is, long-term attachment might be enough for bob to stay with the female even longer. apparently both monogamy and polygamy had their evolutionary benefits, because both still exist today. if bob is monogamous he might stick around and help the child grow up to be strong and independant, if bob is polygamous he might leave the female for another, having more babies, and more genetic stake in the future generation. so you may have noticed in this example, that the probable natural order of things is attraction > sex > love. im guessing it started with christianity, but somewhere down the line, we dissaproved of lust and changed the order to be attraction > love > sex (although we have not changed biologically). Nowadays, i think its safe to say the it is becoming more socially acceptable to have sex before marriage, and again some return to the natural order. about the monogamy/polygamy thing, i think naturally humans are polygamous throughtout their lifetime, but mostly* monogamous at any one point in time. (*probably not at all as monogamous as most people are in marriages today, although there is plenty of cheating going on)

an interesting article on this topic, with evidence for the chemical nature of love: http://www.oxytocin.org/oxytoc/love-science.html

and a great quote about monogamy/polygamy in humans:

"Last year, Steven Phelps, who works at Emory with Dr Young, found great diversity in the distribution of vasopressin receptors (monogamous species tend to have high amounts of these while polygamous species tend to have low amounts) between individual prairie voles. He suggests that this variation contributes to individual differences in social behaviour — in other words, some voles will be more faithful than others. Meanwhile, Dr Young says that he and his colleagues have found a lot of variation in the vasopressin-receptor gene in humans. “We may be able to do things like look at their gene sequence, look at their promoter sequence, to genotype people and correlate that with their fidelity,” he muses."

that is why some people can be married for 40 years to the same partner, and others cheat, lie, and have many short relationships. Maybe if polyamory/polygamy became more socially acceptable, then we wouldnt have so much lieing/cheating/divorces. (it seems cheating is actually more socially acceptable then polygamy!)

I guess it's supposed to feel good but arousal (which usually lasts only one second for me -- and is random and happens rarely) feels to me like an uncomfortable and not at all pleasant muscle spasm. :shock:

well heres where it starts getting personal, and i dont want to offend anyone. i personally believe that some sort of natural process in your brain has been disrupted/blocked/or never existed from birth. (note* just because something is natural does not make it good, poisons are natural and they sometimes kill) i believe that an asexual with zero sex-drive can be explained biologically. advances have already been made to explain the biological nature of homosexuality; i think its safe to say homosexuality is not a choice. i am thoroughly confused by someone who claims to be an asexual yet has a medium to high sex drive. (sex is alot of time and energy, so i can understand even someone with a low sex drive can be asexual)

sex is in the same category of natural needs as are food and water, so any metaphor attempting to explain what arousal or sex feels like (to a sexual person) should use them. although if youve ever been addicted to something, there are also many similarities. (drugs are chemicals, and so is desire/lust/happiness) sex is probably like being stranded in the middle of the sahara, hungry, thirsty, and then coming upon a beautiful oasis with the most delicious fruits, water, and foods. of course, physically, sex is nothing like that, but that is the best example i can give you of the magnitude of the desire and subsequent pleasure derived from sex. masturbation is like coming home to a nice dinner after a long day at the office.

a quote from the previous article:

"Without [a chemical reward system], [animals] might forget to eat, drink and have sex — with disastrous results. That animals continue to do these things is because they make them feel good. And they feel good because of the release of a chemical called dopamine into the brain. "

who knows, maybe the scientific community will find later on that many asexuals have an altered reward system that does not include sex. although i wonder, has anyone ever heard of someone who lacks a desire for food or water? i will look it up...

People would kill, cheat, lie, manipulate, look like a fool, do anything just for THIS!?!?!

people certainly do all of the above for food and water. clearly not done as often for sex, but having a high sex drive is sometimes very hard on individuals. (imagine always being thirsty, but never getting a drink, and living in that state for years)

Why do people say that sex has to be part of an adult relationship ? that if you don't want to have sex, and yet feel attraction to someone, that you're immature ? what problem is there with asexuality, that makes the thought so offensive to people ?

i think it is because people misunderstand what asexuality is all about, that it is quite possibly not a choice, and that sex itself is not enjoyable. others might assume that you like sex just as much as they do, but just choose not to engage in it out of fear, self-consciousness, or other reasons they deem to be "immature." the average person definitely doesnt know the difference between asexuality and celibacy, and probably have no concept of the fact that sex-drives among people vary widely.

i can tell you, as a person with a high sex drive, if i was in a relationship that did not involve sex, and had the option to switch into an otherwise equal relationship, i would 99% of the time. that, however, has never happened as i wouldnt enter a relationship that i felt might end up jeapordizing either of our needs. call me an asshole, jerk, immature, womanizer, whatever, but sex to most sexual people is a "need" that cannot be done without.

that being said, there are plenty of other asexuals and people with low sex drives that you could have a relationship with just fine. many dating sites have an asexual option that you could search by.

edit: another option would be polyamory. of course its no simple matter to suddenly take on this lifestyle, but thousands (millions?) of people do quite happily. the simplest way would be to be in an open, romantically mono, sexually poly (for the partner) relationship. if you were comfortable with that, then everyones needs would be met. the biggest problem most people have with polyamory is jealousy. but im wondering, would you feel jealous as an asexual if your partner was off having sexual relations with others? if you dislike sex, what is there to be jealous of?

DEFINITELY check out that article if you are interested in any of this. i found it while composing my answers to these questions (you may have noticed bits of plagiurism here and there :oops: ), it is very good, informative read.

OH MY GOD!!!! i started this post after the second comment and have spent all that time just answering the 2 questions. i think im going to take a day off before i read all the rest. :shock:

[l'héros]

haha i can understand why you would want to. Thank you for the answers, I appreciate them. I tried to explain asexuality to others before and the majority of responses consisted of "it's just because you're limiting yourself" or "you're just pretending to be special" or "you're immature/in denial, sex is wired into EVERYONE". I really hope that there is more research done on it so at least we can be accepted as existing !

(and I wouldn't blame you for preferring to be in a sexual relationship either, if you don't blame me for wanting not to have it :) )

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

Why do sexuals think that sex is a 'need' like food and water? An individual does not DIE if they don't have sex. I've never heard of anyone dying simply for the reason they didn't have sex. I really hate the analogy.

I already know about all the chemicals and stuff. This is probably why I'm not romantic. To me, sex looks like a drug addiction. People don't NEED drugs, but once they get started on drugs, they become dependent upon the drugs and FEEL they NEED to have it. If they don't get that 'hit' or 'high' they start to feel bad withdrawal symptoms and will do anything to get their hands on the drugs they crave.

[quixotica]

wow, that was one hell of a post! kudos to you, newbie!

it's always fascinating delving into the scientific/evolutional perspective of things.

[quixotica]

Why do sexuals think that sex is a 'need' like food and water? An individual does not DIE if they don't have sex. I've never heard of anyone dying simply for the reason they didn't have sex. I really hate the analogy.

i agree, it's not a very strong analogy. (however, i suppose you could say that sex is a need like food and water in a much broader sense: because, without it, our species would die off.)

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

i agree, it's not a very strong analogy. (however, i suppose you could say that sex is a need like food and water in a much broader sense: because, without it, our species would die off.)

Still. It's not a basic need of the individual! It's like a separate category. We need sleep more than we need sex. It's like the thing on the backburner when it comes to survival. If you don't eat and drink FIRST, you can't reproduce!

[Question]

There are many, many nasty STDs out there that sexuals don't seem to have a care in the world about . . . yet they seem to care AN AWFUL DAMN LOT if you haven't had sex, and treat virginity as if it is a disease!

Why do sexuals treat virginity as a disease to get rid of as quickly as possible -- or else that person is 'sick'?

well that seems to me a harsh generalization. i for one, care A GREAT DEAL about std's and take all necessary precautions to avoid them. i wanted to say that first, because what i will say next will make it sound like i dont care about std's: std's are not nearly as common or harmful as high school health teachers make them out to be. okay, i dont know about africa, im speaking about the US here. there is one std, called Hsv-1 (think: cold sore) that when on genitals, is classified as an std. it is virtually harmless, most americans have it, and its not even worth going to the doctor for, and yet it is still classified as an std. alot of statistics regarding stds are either purposely or unbeknowingly skewed by the rather harmless Hsv-1. im not trying to downplay the role of stds....no wait, i am. even so, the majority of sexually active people ARE concerned with std's. About the whole virginity thing, that really pisses me off too. i think it is just an ego thing or something. but i certainly dont look down upon or discriminate against virgins.

wow Question you better start answering quick or you are going to overwhelmed. lol

too late :shock:

i don't see how sex can be pleasureable,i have sex in the past and found it to be a very uncomfortable exerience that i did not find pleasureable and i know i have heard all the cliche's like you obviously weren't doing it right. I guess my question is how do sexuals get pleasure from sex is purely down to the physical or is it to a degree phsycological

well its interesting you say that, even for sexual people, the first few times they have sex are not actually enjoyable. it is the sex drive and maybe a little faith that keeps the coming back for more, until sex actually becomes pleasurable. now im not saying sex would ever become pleasurable for an asexual, i am only saying that it might make a bit more sense. alot of the pleasure is from satisfying your sex-drive, which is psychological. of couse there is physical pleasure as well, or else us humans wouldnt know what to stick where to satisfy our sex-drives. im sure everyone varies, but i would say 70% psychological satisfaction, 30% short term physical pleasure.

[quixotica]

Still. It's not a basic need of the individual! It's like a separate category. We need sleep more than we need sex. It's like the thing on the backburner when it comes to survival. If you don't eat and drink FIRST, you can't reproduce!

i agree wholeheartedly.

[AVENCakes]

I treat sex as a "need" for other people. As in, I expect sexuals to want it and accept this, so long as they don't wave it in my face or try and make me feel like a freak for not wanting it.

Still. It's not a basic need of the individual! It's like a separate category. We need sleep more than we need sex. It's like the thing on the backburner when it comes to survival. If you don't eat and drink FIRST, you can't reproduce!

Here here! :D

Besides, I think half of the current population stopped having sex- the result would be good. We kind of have too many people.

To the other half: You can start shagging after we no longer have people in foster homes/up for adoption/starving/living on the street even in 1st world countries!

...sorry other half.

[Question]

Why do sexuals think that sex is a 'need' like food and water? An individual does not DIE if they don't have sex. I've never heard of anyone dying simply for the reason they didn't have sex. I really hate the analogy.

I already know about all the chemicals and stuff. This is probably why I'm not romantic. To me, sex looks like a drug addiction. People don't NEED drugs, but once they get started on drugs, they become dependent upon the drugs and FEEL they NEED to have it. If they don't get that 'hit' or 'high' they start to feel bad withdrawal symptoms and will do anything to get their hands on the drugs they crave.

it is not an analogy at all, but rather quite literal. you can say it is not a "need" in the sense that you wont die without it, but then you would also have to claim that water and food werent really needs until just before the moment you die from dehydration or starvation. thats ridiculous, they were needs all along, and you shouldnt have to die from lack of them just to prove their necessity?

i think you answered your own question in the second paragraph. sex is like a drug that most people are addicted to from puberty onwards, and asexuals are not. if asexuals are immune to the drug, they dont ever feel the "high" but also never feel the dependence or withdrawal symptoms.

maybe we just have different definitions for the term "need". in my definition, the cocaine addict "needs" cocaine. in your definition, cocaine is bad, and therefore it can never be necessary. semantics.

Besides, I think half of the current population stopped having sex- the result would be good. We kind of have too many people.

To the other half: You can start shagging after we no longer have people in foster homes/up for adoption/starving/living on the street even in 1st world countries!

...sorry other half.

just to point out, that in terms of ecology it is natural to push the boundaries of available resources to the point that individuals of the species struggle to survive. at some point the species will hit some sort of equilibrium, in which case a vast majority of the resources will have sufficient resources for survival, without excess.

due to human civilization, our situation is far more complex, but i think it is remarkable that we do not have MORE people starving/poor. what other species donates so many resources to those members too unfit to survive independently (disabled, mentally ill, etc.)?

theoretically if we cut our population in half, we would have such abundant resources that we could all live happily, but then whos to stop the population from again exploding until resources are limited?

homocidal bunnie - put that avatar in paint and scale it down or something :shock:

[Nico-Nico Friendo]

I don't have to taste a poison to know it can kill me, if I've seen that many other people have died from it and I am told it is deadly. And so, no, you don't have to die before realising that not eating or drinking will kill you.

But NOT having sex has NEVER killed anyone! (It could possibly kill you if you DID have it, but not from NOT having it.)

Therefore, I do not consider it a genuine 'need'. It is more like an illusional need. Sex is simply nature's 'trick' to get things to reproduce.

[Maarek]

I think it would be safe to place it as a need on a societal/species level (as in outside of Artificial Insemenation, we don't make other humans without it....not that we need more total people right now) which causes it to be a major biological drive for the vast majority of people. So on the micro/individual level it probably is a want in that it won't kill you not to have, but the societal and biological pressures for most make it nearly indistiguishable from a need. Of course the dangers involved in reproduction (STDS) are just the result of the reproductive traits of other living things as well....odd how that works eh?

[Question]

I don't have to taste a poison to know it can kill me, if I've seen that many other people have died from it and I am told it is deadly. And so, no, you don't have to die before realising that not eating or drinking will kill you.

But NOT having sex has NEVER killed anyone! (It could possibly kill you if you DID have it, but not from NOT having it.)

Therefore, I do not consider it a genuine 'need'. It is more like an illusional need. Sex is simply nature's 'trick' to get things to reproduce.

is the heroin addicts' addiction merely an illusion because he could stop any time without fear of death? how is the "feeling of a need" any less discomforting that a "true" need? as long as you are alive, arnt the "real" needs, and the illusionary needs, all just needs in the end? the reason sex is put in the same category as food and water is because they are all physiological drives.

i believe that all physiological needs are psychologically analagous, with the only difference being that a lack of some cause death and a lack of others merely severe discomfort. to say that only the ones who are necessary for survival can be called needs whereas all the rest are merely illusions is ridiculous. even if you must call them wants, the difference in how the drives feel is negligible. (im assuming noone here has ever approached death from a lack of food or water) i have fasted for days to make weight for wrestling, as well as severely dehydrated myself, and i can honestly say that the craving for water or food was less then the desire i have had, at times, for sex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslows_hierarchy_of_needs

"If some needs are not fulfilled, a human's physiological needs take the highest priority. Physiological needs can control thoughts and behaviours, and can cause people to feel sickness, pain, and discomfort."