TooOldForThis Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but it seemed to be the closest one available, so here goes... A friend of mine, who is definitely not asexual, was saying recently that she would consider being in a relationship with an asexual if she were not already in a relationship. I'm not inclined to disbelieve her, because she has been in a relationship with another sexual for six years now, and has not had sex with her partner (or, for that matter, anyone else) simply because she wants to take it slow and be careful to make sure that sex isn't the central point of the relationship. Her partner also has not had sex, despite being sexual. I also know that there are numerous people who stay celibate until marriage for religious, moral, or cultural reasons. All of this seems to imply that some (not all) sexual people can be happy in long-term sexless relationships. As such, I was wondering if, since many asexuals seem to be apprehensive about starting a relationship with a sexual person, they might consider starting one with someone who has remained celibate for a long time. Just a thought, and I'm not sure exactly where to go with it. Does anyone have any comments/ideas on this? Link to post Share on other sites
Significant Form Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Yknow, I've given this some thought from time to time, and I think the likelihood of such an arrangement working out would depend on their reasons for celibacy; namely, if they were celibate for religious reasons, there's probably a fair chance that they also abstain from cuddling, because as everyone knows, cuddling always leads to sexual activity -- or simply to thinking about sexual activity, which is just as bad. I don't think I'd want a romantic relationship without cuddling. Link to post Share on other sites
Batman's Ace Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I would absolutely love to find a long-term celibate sexual! I'm glad to hear they're not totally a myth, although they're probably less likely to want to be in a romantic relationship. Yknow, I've given this some thought from time to time, and I think the likelihood of such an arrangement working out would depend on their reasons for celibacy; namely, if they were celibate for religious reasons, there's probably a fair chance that they also abstain from cuddling, because as everyone knows, cuddling always leads to sexual activity -- or simply to thinking about sexual activity, which is just as bad. I don't think I'd want a romantic relationship without cuddling. You have a point that they're more likely to be uncomfortable with physical affection of other kinds, but be a little generous about the motives. The desire to have sex is strong in a lot of sexuals, especially, it seems, after a long time of no sexual activity. Like if you fasted for three days straight and somebody handed you a hot dog and said you could smell it and lick it, but under no circumstances could you eat it. That would be agonizing. It's not that cuddling always leads to sexual activity, but that being reminded of a desire can be very stressful. Anyway, not everybody considers cuddling to be an activity that's leading up to anything. So I'm sure there are some religious celibates who would have no problem with it. There are other behaviors, like kissing on the lips, which are often sexualized but also can be used as perfectly ordinary expressions of affection--hence the amount I've seen kids kiss their parents that way; in a lot of areas it's culturally normal. Link to post Share on other sites
JAKQ7111 Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 You have a point that they're more likely to be uncomfortable with physical affection of other kinds, but be a little generous about the motives. The desire to have sex is strong in a lot of sexuals, especially, it seems, after a long time of no sexual activity. Like if you fasted for three days straight and somebody handed you a hot dog and said you could smell it and lick it, but under no circumstances could you eat it. That would be agonizing. It's not that cuddling always leads to sexual activity, but that being reminded of a desire can be very stressful. Anyway, not everybody considers cuddling to be an activity that's leading up to anything. So I'm sure there are some religious celibates who would have no problem with it. There are other behaviors, like kissing on the lips, which are often sexualized but also can be used as perfectly ordinary expressions of affection--hence the amount I've seen kids kiss their parents that way; in a lot of areas it's culturally normal. I always thought that most celibate sexuals, especially if said celibacy comes from a religious background, abstained not only from sexual activity but from romantic activity as well, because in the minds of many sexuals, the two are so far intertwined that they cannot be separated, and even though no sex is necessarily involved, romance -> affection, and affection -> sex. I know that some Orthodox and Hasidic Jews practice what is called "shomer negiah", which means that until they get married, they are FORBIDDEN from making any sort of physical contact with members of the opposite sex (presumably not family), and I'm not sure how it works in other religions. Of course, back before I knew the difference between romantic and sexual attraction/drive, I assumed that Christians believed that someone could go to Hell simply for having a crush on someone, regardless of whether or not they acted on it, so I may not be the most knowledgeable. If someone more well-versed in these matters could inform me, that would be much appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites
canned beans Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Of course, back before I knew the difference between romantic and sexual attraction/drive, I assumed that Christians believed that someone could go to Hell simply for having a crush on someone, regardless of whether or not they acted on it, so I may not be the most knowledgeable. If someone more well-versed in these matters could inform me, that would be much appreciated. Good gravy! That's one of the oddest misconceptions about Christianity I've heard! Link to post Share on other sites
JAKQ7111 Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Of course, back before I knew the difference between romantic and sexual attraction/drive, I assumed that Christians believed that someone could go to Hell simply for having a crush on someone, regardless of whether or not they acted on it, so I may not be the most knowledgeable. If someone more well-versed in these matters could inform me, that would be much appreciated. Good gravy! That's one of the oddest misconceptions about Christianity I've heard! It certainly is, isn't it! I guess I assumed that the whole "premarital sex is not allowed" thing, lead to "premarital kissing is not allowed", because I have met people who think that, and that led to "premarital romance is frowned upon, especially if the people involved are too affectionate", and then with the whole "lust is a Deadly Sin" thing, I assumed that romantic attraction = lust = sin. I now realize that that was an EPIC ace moment, and a very incorrect judgment of Christian folk. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 It certainly is, isn't it! I guess I assumed that the whole "premarital sex is not allowed" thing, lead to "premarital kissing is not allowed", because I have met people who think that, and that led to "premarital romance is frowned upon, especially if the people involved are too affectionate", and then with the whole "lust is a Deadly Sin" thing, I assumed that romantic attraction = lust = sin. I now realize that that was an EPIC ace moment, and a very incorrect judgment of Christian folk. I'd daresay that with the bit "he who looks upon a woman with a lustful gaze has already committed adultery in his heart" in Jesus' Sermon on the Mountain, it's not all that far-fetched a mistake to make. Being ace, it's not too surprising if one remains fuzzy about what exactly a "lustful gaze" is supposed to mean. BTW, "romantic attraction = lust = sin" still rings true to me today, even though I know the majority of Christians would not agree to it, and even though it's been over 20 years since I thought of myself as Christian. *shrugs* Link to post Share on other sites
MadRat Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 As such, I was wondering if, since many asexuals seem to be apprehensive about starting a relationship with a sexual person, they might consider starting one with someone who has remained celibate for a long time. I wouldn´t because celibate for a long time doesn´t mean celibate for a whole life. And celibacy isn´t usual thing in my country, just as religion isn´t, and I´ve never heard about a guy who is nonreligious and celibate. I don´t want a religious partner because I think people should have similar opinions and values to live together but even if I wanted to have a religious partner, I´m totaly against marriage - I can´t see it as anything else than killer of romance. I´m marriage-repulsed. So "no sex before marriage" would mean "no sex ever". That´s pretty cruel. I don´t think sexuals should stay celibate for a long time and fight their natural desire for sex. IMO it is equally wrong as asexuals who force themselves into sex to look "normal". Link to post Share on other sites
Notte stellata Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 As such, I was wondering if, since many asexuals seem to be apprehensive about starting a relationship with a sexual person, they might consider starting one with someone who has remained celibate for a long time. I wouldn´t because celibate for a long time doesn´t mean celibate for a whole life. And celibacy isn´t usual thing in my country, just as religion isn´t, and I´ve never heard about a guy who is nonreligious and celibate. I don´t want a religious partner because I think people should have similar opinions and values to live together but even if I wanted to have a religious partner, I´m totaly against marriage - I can´t see it as anything else than killer of romance. I´m marriage-repulsed. So "no sex before marriage" would mean "no sex ever". That´s pretty cruel. I don´t think sexuals should stay celibate for a long time and fight their natural desire for sex. IMO it is equally wrong as asexuals who force themselves into sex to look "normal". Basically my view on this. First, no sex before marriage pretty much means sex after marriage; second, if a sexual plans to be celibate for life and not because of medical issues, then it's most likely because of religion. I can't be with someone that religious. It may work if the asexual is religious too, but what's the chance of finding a sexual who plans to be celibate for life? Even lower than finding an ace partner IMO. :P Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.