Jump to content

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

To the extent that we all lean on some forms of communication more than others, yes. You could say verbal communication is taking up the slack of poor sexual communication. 

...and potentially, conversely, that sexual communication could play a bigger role in relationships where verbal communication is consistently lacking.

 

I don’t mean that people who communicate excellently verbally would then not need sex; just wondering if this is part of why some mixed couples weather the whole thing better than others.  E.g., if you rely more heavily on sexual communication for reassurance that you’re valued and loved (because you don’t get that reassurance verbally), or you’re someone who communicates valuing and love better/more naturally sexually than verbally, is that a bigger hurdle to jump?

 

It’s kind of like the love languages premise... except with love languages the author presumes everyone can learn to cheerfully do the various things even if they don’t personally value them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Yep, that's always been the flaw with the love languages thing. It's always going to be a strain to use your second 'language', but sex/touch must be the hardest.

Yeah, it seems like there’s a significant difference - in both effort required and success likelihood - between things like remembering to get small, meaningful gifts (even if you’re someone who could care less about receiving gifts) more often and communicating via sex (whether you’re ace, or sexual but not someone who experiences or utilizes sex that way).  That’s not even considering repulsion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think so?  I think it’s more that different things are important to different people - and thereby require differing levels and types of energy.

 

For example, some people really love finding perfect gifts.  While it certainly takes time and energy, and I don’t mean to belittle that, it’s time and energy spent happily doing something they adore.  Going out gift-shopping after a long workday is a treat for them, not drudgery, and they’ll likely feel uplifted by doing it.

 

It’s not just that they like seeing their recipients happy, although that’s part of it.  They also just plain love gifting.

 

Now, sometimes people who love to give gifts couldn’t care less about receiving them.  Others, though, also find celebrating personal milestones very important.  They are crushed if a partner forgets an anniversary, or a friend forgets a birthday.

 

Those forgetters may love their partners wholeheartedly, but - for them - gifting is not enjoyable and remembering occasions isn’t  deeply meaningful.  They don’t view the process as pleasant or rewarding.

 

It’s not indicative (to me) of a difference in depth of feelings or emotional investment, although in my experience the forgotten are likely to view it as one.  I don’t know if it’s just personality differences, attachment style/issues, or what, but I think it’s more at that level,

 

It certainly can be a virtually unbridgeable divide, though.  The issue isn’t so much that people don’t care enough; it’s that they’re somehow unable to show that care in a way the other person can recognize/receive it (or, from the other side, the partner isn’t able to find what s/he needs in the relationship).

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

could it indicate the depth of the underlying emotion is less than someone who will put themselves out more.

To be a little more succinct, I think 1) even something smaller like finding a meaningful gift requires both different amounts of effort and a different pleasure level depending on how naturally you express yourself that way and 2) you can’t accurately judge the depth of someone’s emotions by how they act.  You can only compare to what it would mean if you acted the same way, and that’s going to be less and less valid the less similar the two of you are.

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

Doesn't that mean it's not an effort - so it's not actually done for their partner's benefit, that's just a happy coincidence.

There’s some happy coincidence but I don’t think it’s not an effort; it’s just pleasant work rather than unpleasant work.

 

Is the gift more meaningful because the person thought finding it for you sucked?

 

9 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I'm not bothered about giving or receiving gifts, but if my wife had said it was one of the principle ways she deeply felt loved, and without gifts, she felt rejected and distanced, and I just said 'sorry, I don't do gifts', most people would see that simply as me not being bothered. 

I went through this for a very long time with a former friend and it’s not that simple.  I didn’t just tell her “I don’t do gifts,” I made the effort to get them, but it was much more stressful for me than she understood and it was not really (from what she said) wholly satisfying for her either.  In the end we were both putting a lot more effort into the whole remembering/gifting/receiving cycle than would people who were better matched and yet the outcome was second-rate for both of us.

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

I think you can, roughly, particularly if they know how their actions will be interpreted.

 

But we generally reach this point in discussions. You're prepared to accept that someone says [a] and means it, even though their actions are , which tends to contradict [a]. I'm not.

To me this is (slightly?) different.

 

I don’t think you can reverse-engineer someone’s thought processes or underlying feelings from their behavior solely on basis of comparing it to your own.

 

That’s not the same as observing the same person over time and noting that their own actions bely (belie?) their stated beliefs.

 

Real-life example:  In non-winter weather I like to walk in the shade.  If I turn the corner and am suddenly in the sun I will cross the street as soon as possible to get back in the shade.

 

I did this once while walking with my long-ago ex, in NYC.  Apparently there was someone of a different race walking towards us at the time.  My ex, with whom I often fought about (his) bigotry, insisted my crossing the street was proof that I was secretly bigoted as well and just unwilling to admit it.

 

He was trying to infer my thought process from my actions using his own.  Fail.

 

On the other hand, if he observed over time that - despite my insisting it was about shade and not about who else was using the sidewalk - I actually only crossed the street (regardless of the sun) when someone of a specific race was coming towards me, OR that I crossed into the sun when someone of a specific race was coming at me but never otherwise, then I would agree with your thinking that my actions disproved my words.

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

Kind of, yes. Not that I want them to do sucky things, but they thought doing something sucked but did it because I'd like the result. That has to be a clearer demonstration of love than doing something you enjoy anyway.

Despite being a hardcore martyr, I’m not sure degree of sacrifice is  really a good way to judge intensjty of feelings.

 

6 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

The point is that you bothered. If you'd just said 'tough', wouldn't you expect that to come across as less caring than saying 'I'll try'?

This does go back to the above point about observed results.  I was actually trying hella hard and yet to her - because she had to do more reminding than she would have required - it looked too much to her like I was saying “tough.”

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

I'm saying if the other person knows that you interpret action A as them doing something they wanted to do anyway, and action B as them making an effort to do something purely for your sake, and they continue to do just action A and never action B, it's fair to interpret this as them not wanting to do something purely for your sake, just things they want to do anyway, and respond to that as being their state of mind.

...and I’m saying that’s not what I meant when I made my post.

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

I think credit should be given for effort, as long as it's clear some is being made. How much, and how much success is necessary is another of the grey areas.

...but that requires that effort be observed *and correctly interpreted as effort* on the recipient’s part.

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

I'm confused about which post now :)

This one:

 

47 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

To be a little more succinct, I think 1) even something smaller like finding a meaningful gift requires both different amounts of effort and a different pleasure level depending on how naturally you express yourself that way and 2) you can’t accurately judge the depth of someone’s emotions by how they act.  You can only compare to what it would mean if you acted the same way, and that’s going to be less and less valid the less similar the two of you are.

 

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

I know this is veering close to the 'if you loved me, you would' argument, but I find it hard not to wonder.

I’m about to make myself an easy target but here goes (it’s what I think).

Part of me believes in the “if you loved me you would want to make me happy” type of scenario because quite frankly, it’s true.

That may not be true for a sex repulsed asexual but if it’s just the case that you have no innate desire for partnered sex (not that you aren’t capable of sex and capable of some physical enjoyment like some asexuals are) then why can’t you expect someone to want to do something that will make you happy. Why is that so terrible. Sex is such a soft target and so easily demonised.

 

 

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

Yep.

Which goes back around... only accepting the “right kind of thing” as effort, based on what you observe and what it would mean if you did the same thing, is not giving credit for effort.

 

Suppose person A is bad at remembering birthdays.  They have to remember to put them in the calendar (so, a reminder to remember to remember), and then they have to actually act on each reminder and finally go get a card or whatever.

 

They put in the reminder to

add birthdays.  At the start of the year they add person B’s birthday.  They get the reminder and add “card for B” to the shopping list.  They get the card.

 

They forget to mail it.

 

Lots of effort on A’s end, looks like none to B.

 

Now, if A always remembers to

send a card to C and just forgets B, that’s a bit different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they love you just as much as you love them. Maybe they don't want to live a life where they're always uncomfortable, anxious and, eventually, feeling sexually violated, just because they love you. 

 

Compatibility matters. You don't have to live in misery forever just to prove you love someone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, James121 said:

why can’t you expect someone to want to do something that will make you happy.

I think the issue that makes sex a bit unique is that, for a lot of the sexuals who post here, just doing it to make the sexual partner happy isn’t enough/what the sexual partner is looking for. For sexual partners who want a mutually-desired, connected experience, there’s no way the ace can meet that by “doing it to make someone happy.”

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

Ultimately, yes, and if the degree of incompatibility is too great, then the relationship should end. But I think it behoves both people to make an effort to go outside their comfort zone and see what happens. 

This is where the disagreement lies, though. You seem to think you have insight into everyone's degree of discomfort and you don't. Maybe one person is ten times as uncomfortable even though they've only made one tenth the compromises. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

I think the issue that makes sex a bit unique is that, for a lot of the sexuals who post here, just doing it to make the sexual partner happy isn’t enough/what the sexual partner is looking for. For sexual partners who want a mutually-desired, connected experience, there’s no way the ace can meet that by “doing it to make someone happy.”

True, fair point. 

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

I disagree. If you know someone hates heights, but they agree to go up the Eiffel Tower with you because you want to (and obviously don't hate heights), then clearly you can make a judgement on it.

 

This 'we can't know how other people feel' trope is common on AVEN, and it's way less true than people claim.

Again, that gets to the end of what I said in my sidewalk example.  If someone does things which are visibly inconsistent with their stated beliefs, that’s different.  If someone says “I’m lactose intolerant” but eats dairy all the time, under no duress, and is never sick from it despite taking no medication, that at least gives you reason to think they don’t know what the term means (and could mean they are lying if they tell you they can’t eat your cooking because it contains dairy).

 

However, if you cook cheese ravioli and they pick around it, and you assume that means they hate your cooking (because that’s what it means when you push your food around on the plate), you’re “mindreading.”

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

But I'm explicitly not saying 'based on what it would mean if I did the same thing'.

What would you be basing your assessment of credible effort on, if not your interpretation of what you observe?

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

If they've said they don't have any particular discomfort and still just... don't.... do anything palpable, I don't see the logic of interpreting them doing something they were going to do anything as showing equal effort.

 

And if they're not willing to make an effort, yep, I will read something into how they feel about me into that. 

Well sure, as a practical matter I think that's wise. You don't have to disagree with their stated feelings though... It's sufficient to just say "for whatever reasons and regardless of the challenges you're experiencing, this isn't how I want my relationship to be" and bounce. 

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

If they've said they don't have any particular discomfort and still just... don't.... do anything palpable, I don't see the logic of interpreting them doing something they were going to do instead, as showing equal effort.

 

And if they're not willing to make an effort, yep, I will read something into how they feel about me into that. 

That ultimately has nothing to do with their depth of feeling and everything to do with how the relationship does not meet your needs.

 

It’s not wrong to end a relationship that’s not meeting your needs; you just can’t know (from your needs not being met) whether or not they actually care less or more than you do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Telecaster68 said:

Well, based on a true story, if putting a reminder in your phone to hug your partner is too much effort despite them asking, I think it's a fair interpretation to take that as really not giving much of a fuck, however many small presents you bring in.

Whereas I would say “maybe it’s a lot harder for them to do than you think, but if you really need those hugs it’s probably not the right relationship for you.”

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Telecaster68 said:

But depth of feeling is surely a pretty usual requirement of a relationship in order it meets needs, isn't it?

 

How many people would be happy in a relationship which didn't involve their partner having deep feelings for them?

 

Interesting though... yet again, AVEN challenges my assumptions about a relationship.

That’s the opposite of what I was trying to say, which was that your partner could have very deep feelings for you despite not demonstrating that to you in what you feel is an acceptable or workable way.

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

In what world is putting a reminder on your phone hard?

A lot of the time when someone just can’t deliver on seemingly simple things, those things are actually quite hard for them (often emotionally).

 

Like, the presents-and-events former friend.  She could not clean her bathroom mirror, no matter how much her SO nagged, showed her how, etc.  She just could not seem to get it done.  Two spritzes of glass cleaner and a quick wipe once a week.  Couldn’t do it.

 

In therapy it turns out her mother was abusive over chores as a child, making her clean the mirror until her fingers bled.

 

Not saying that explains the phone reminder situation, but something similar could.

 

Either way, you don’t get the hug and it’s a problem.  That’s the part you can control.

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

At this point, I'm starting to question whether those strong feelings exist, because they won't even try to do something different when they know the effect it's having. 

All you know from this is that something out there influences them more than your request does.

 

That may be unacceptable to you, and that’s your choice.  It doesn’t speak to the strength of their feelings.

 

It’s reasonable to say “for this relationship to work for me, I need xyz” (and then take the consequences, obviously).  It’s not reasonable to say “if you really loved me you would xyz.”

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

Every time there's a circumstance in which someone on the asexual spectrum or in that general ballpark is doing something which is on the face of less than good behaviour, the assumption is that there's an exculpatory explanation, not that they're a bit lazy, or selfish, or thoughtless. And by extension, partners are unreasonable for not instantly accepting this without any basis or explanation.

 

It gets a bit wearying, especially when AVEN in general makes a big deal of asexuality being an orientation, rather than having any correlation with, how can I put this... being a bit fucked up.

If you’re going by the results, rather than by the underlying rationale, what difference does it make whether they’re lazy and uncaring versus justified in their (in)action?  The underlying rationale only matters if you’re willing to give someone’s behavior the benefit of the doubt based on it.

 

If your barometer is the outcome, your choice is going to be the same regardless of the “why.”

 

That’s not a judgment on your choice.  If you can’t (or won’t) tolerate something, you don’t have to justify it.

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

It says 'something in my life is more important than you'. Which does, in fact, speak to the strength of their feelings.

All it says about their feelings is that, yes, you are not the absolute most important thing in their life.  That doesn’t mean they don’t have very strong feelings for you.  You could be right up there in second place by a tiny margin.

 

If you believe that your partner has to place you above every other thing that influences their life, all the time, no matter what... then, yes, it would say their feelings aren’t strong enough to meet your requirements.

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

Every time there's a circumstance in which someone on the asexual spectrum or in that general ballpark is doing something which is on the face of less than good behaviour, the assumption is that there's an exculpatory explanation,

Just to clarify, my stories about crossing the street/bigotry, presents, and washing the mirror were true stories about those specific topics.  They were not metaphors for sex.

Link to post
Share on other sites
nanogretchen4

I think in general asexuals and sexuals are not compatible and should not be together in romantic relationships. There could be rare exceptions, but it's a good general guideline. The reason they shouldn't be together is severe, permanent incompatibility. I do not think either the asexual or the sexual should make horrible sacrifices that ruin their quality of life to be together. They should probably just go their separate ways on the basis of incompatibility.

 

It is not reasonable and healthy to expect your partner to have nothing in their life more important than you. You expect them to rank you above their own well being, all of their family and friends, their values, their life goals, even their children? Are you sure you want to sacrifice that much for them? Saying if someone loved you they would do something they clearly don't want to do makes no sense. Do you love them enough not to pressure them into doing things they don't want to do? Like the Eiffel Tower example. Maybe your partner has a severe phobia of heights that it would take years of therapy to overcome. It would be cruel to expect them to indulge your preference for going up in the Eiffel Tower together. Sex is obviously that level of awful or worse for some asexuals. The solution is not to guilt them in to sex. The solution is nearly always to break up and find someone with a compatible sexual orientation.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

If they've said they don't have any particular discomfort and still just... don't.... do anything palpable, I don't see the logic of interpreting them doing something they were going to do instead, as showing equal effort.

 

And if they're not willing to make an effort, yep, I will read something into how they feel about me into that. 

I'm getting slightly confused by this discussion. Do you mean that the sexual partner knowing their asexual partner is suffering in order for the sexual to have (presumably) enjoyable sex proves that the asexual loves the sexual?? I find that slightly disturbing.  I'm sure I have made it known that I used to be a willing and not repulsed asexual but expectations like what I have just described ended up making me repulsed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nanogretchen4 said:

It is not reasonable and healthy to expect your partner to have nothing in their life more important than you. You expect them to rank you above their own well being, all of their family and friends, their values, their life goals, even their children? Are you sure you want to sacrifice that much for them?

*nods*

 

”You’re everything to me,” “I would die for you,” “there’s literally nothing I wouldn’t do for you,” and the like all sound wonderfully romantic... but they’re rarely true and generally shouldn’t be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...