Jump to content

What is the point of asexual romance?


Roy M.

Recommended Posts

I don't get it. What makes the relationship romantic if there's nothing sexual to it? Isn't sex ultimately why romantic relationships are a thing, you know, to get to know someone before you open up sexually to them? What makes romance without the sex any different than a close friendship? Why not simply call it friendship then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

An asexual romantic relationship to me is basically everything that's in a normal relationship minus sex. Just because a person doesn't have an interest in sex doesn't mean they don't want to feel close to another human being and that can be taken in a number of ways. I'm in a (really) long distance relationship with another Ace but I feel as though I'm the closest person to her and she to me.

I don't know about others but calling what we have a friendship just wouldn't feel right because to me it's not a friendship, it's something more than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, these people in relationships don't share things they wouldn't dare share with anyone else? kiss, cuddle, and stay together through everything?

Ultimately it's all about different level of closeness with that person, a friend is someone you know and you trust. Someone you like to spend time with and share interests with. A romantic partner is someone you feel very close to and (most likely) feel romantic attraction towards. Someone your willing to be that close to, able to trust that much. And then there's the actual romantic side, kissing, cuddling etc. Which of course I'd assume most people don't do with their friends casually. It's a statement about how much you love that person, that your willing to be in such a position where your closer, and more vulnerable to them. And you trust them for it.

And no, ask any asexual on this website, romantic relationships are not just a means to an end for sexual relationships.Even though is most sexual's it is sort of something that goes hand in hand with a relationship, but even in that situation they're side by side, not one in front of the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Typical Power

I'm the SO, of the first responder. (Asexual Scottish Author)

I think It's increasingly an interesting question when you bring up long distance relationships. Seeing as we are close, but not physically in any sense of the word.

I think there is a level of dedication in a relationship, that isn't there in most friends. You expect to stick together, and you want to share your life with them.

Friends come and go, even the best of friends still live seperate lives. But in a relationship, that line begins to blur. You begin to share your life with that person.

It's like this: Imagine you live in a house. But you're a private person and never let anyone in your house. Whenever friends come over, you meet them outside, and go spend the evening at the pub. (Or whatever it is you do).

But they never go into your house. And you never go into theirs.

Until you're in a relationship, and you slowly let your partner enter that house, look at what a terrible mess it is, and they say "It's nice in here." So they stay for tea. Your partner starts coming over regularly, and your relationship exists inside your house. It may look similar, but the location (Pub vs house) is very important. That difference, is what seperates a friendship from a romance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, these people in relationships don't share things they wouldn't dare share with anyone else? kiss, cuddle, and stay together through everything?

Ultimately it's all about different level of closeness with that person, a friend is someone you know and you trust. Someone you like to spend time with and share interests with. A romantic partner is someone you feel very close to and (most likely) feel romantic attraction towards. Someone your willing to be that close to, able to trust that much. And then there's the actual romantic side, kissing, cuddling etc. Which of course I'd assume most people don't do with their friends casually. It's a statement about how much you love that person, that your willing to be in such a position where your closer, and more vulnerable to them. And you trust them for it.

And no, ask any asexual on this website, romantic relationships are not just a means to an end for sexual relationships.Even though is most sexual's it is sort of something that goes hand in hand with a relationship, but even in that situation they're side by side, not one in front of the other.

That still doesn't make it really any different than a close friendship. There are people who are simply close friends who those types of things and still have separate romantic lives.

Maybe, in the more Puritanical parts of America, there is a clear difference between friendship and sexless romance, but in other countries and in some of the more social diverse and liberated parts of America, there's no line at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kitty Spoon Train
So, these people in relationships don't share things they wouldn't dare share with anyone else? kiss, cuddle, and stay together through everything?

Ultimately it's all about different level of closeness with that person, a friend is someone you know and you trust. Someone you like to spend time with and share interests with. A romantic partner is someone you feel very close to and (most likely) feel romantic attraction towards. Someone your willing to be that close to, able to trust that much. And then there's the actual romantic side, kissing, cuddling etc. Which of course I'd assume most people don't do with their friends casually. It's a statement about how much you love that person, that your willing to be in such a position where your closer, and more vulnerable to them. And you trust them for it.

And no, ask any asexual on this website, romantic relationships are not just a means to an end for sexual relationships.Even though is most sexual's it is sort of something that goes hand in hand with a relationship, but even in that situation they're side by side, not one in front of the other.

That still doesn't make it really any different than a close friendship. There are people who are simply close friends who those types of things and still have separate romantic lives.

Maybe, in the more Puritanical parts of America, there is a clear difference between friendship and sexless romance, but in other countries and in some of the more social diverse and liberated parts of America, there's no line at all.

I wish that were true. It would make my life a lot simpler. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata

There's no hard and fast rule that applies to every relationship. Some people say the difference is sharing a life together, but there're people who would like to live with their friends, and people who don't need to live with a partner; some people say the difference is the level of trust/emotional intimacy/disclosure, etc, but there are people who have very strong and intimate friendships as well. Essentially, it comes down to how each individual feels inside, and how they choose to define their own relationships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference as it appears to outside viewers is pretty simple: friends come and go throughout your life, they aren't exclusive relationships, and one doesn't care THAT much if the connection eventually disappears.

Romantic partners are usually exclusive in SOME way, even if it's not obvious at first. They don't get put on the back burner like a friend might, and there's usually an expectation that the relationship will be long-lasting if not permanent.

The difference as it is to the people themselves varies for every relationship and is not very simple to describe, so I won't try.

Your idea of what relationships are is pretty cynical and incorrect for the majority of relationships. If romantic relationships were only for picking sexual partners, than it wouldn't only be asexuals who would refrain from relationships. Celibate people, people with certain injuries or disabilities, people with certain diseases, etc. Would ALL be permanently single because they either don't want sex or can't get it, so why bother? This is clearly not the case for them, and it isn't the case for asexuals either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love, real love, is so much deeper than physicality. It's what pulls at your heart strings and emotions in ways a simple friendship never could.

To some people, sex is viewed as romantic, but there are so many different forms of romance. What about buying a boque of roses? What about writing love letters? What about kissing in the rain? Holding hands and watching the stars? 'Just friends' wouldn't do those things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The difference as it appears to outside viewers is pretty simple: friends come and go throughout your life, they aren't exclusive relationships, and one doesn't care THAT much if the connection eventually disappears.

Romantic partners are usually exclusive in SOME way, even if it's not obvious at first. They don't get put on the back burner like a friend might, and there's usually an expectation that the relationship will be long-lasting if not permanent.

The difference as it is to the people themselves varies for every relationship and is not very simple to describe, so I won't try.

Your idea of what relationships are is pretty cynical and incorrect for the majority of relationships. If romantic relationships were only for picking sexual partners, than it wouldn't only be asexuals who would refrain from relationships. Celibate people, people with certain injuries or disabilities, people with certain diseases, etc. Would ALL be permanently single because they either don't want sex or can't get it, so why bother? This is clearly not the case for them, and it isn't the case for asexuals either.

Yeah, it's typically the sex that is exclusive. Without that, what else is there that would need to be exclusive that couldn't possibly be done with a friend? I can't think of anything.

So, these people in relationships don't share things they wouldn't dare share with anyone else? kiss, cuddle, and stay together through everything?

Ultimately it's all about different level of closeness with that person, a friend is someone you know and you trust. Someone you like to spend time with and share interests with. A romantic partner is someone you feel very close to and (most likely) feel romantic attraction towards. Someone your willing to be that close to, able to trust that much. And then there's the actual romantic side, kissing, cuddling etc. Which of course I'd assume most people don't do with their friends casually. It's a statement about how much you love that person, that your willing to be in such a position where your closer, and more vulnerable to them. And you trust them for it.

And no, ask any asexual on this website, romantic relationships are not just a means to an end for sexual relationships.Even though is most sexual's it is sort of something that goes hand in hand with a relationship, but even in that situation they're side by side, not one in front of the other.

That still doesn't make it really any different than a close friendship. There are people who are simply close friends who those types of things and still have separate romantic lives.

Maybe, in the more Puritanical parts of America, there is a clear difference between friendship and sexless romance, but in other countries and in some of the more social diverse and liberated parts of America, there's no line at all.

I wish that were true. It would make my life a lot simpler. :lol:

Maybe it is true and you're making your life needlessly difficult?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kitty Spoon Train

I wish that were true. It would make my life a lot simpler. :lol:

Maybe it is true and you're making your life needlessly difficult?

Nah. Every which way I've tried to explain it so far has left most people scratching their heads. "Sexuals" that is. I've met aces who get it. But that's relatively much easier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even among sexual people romance and romantic relationships aren't only about sex nor is sex the ultimate reason for romance. Sometimes romance is there for its own sake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maplestarchicken

Having someone who cares about you and is as committed to your happiness as you are to their happiness. If friendships are like being siblings, asexual romances are like being twins. Your twin isn't anything more than another sibling, but there is often a different level of closeness and feeling like the other person is an extension of yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata
Yeah, it's typically the sex that is exclusive. Without that, what else is there that would need to be exclusive that couldn't possibly be done with a friend? I can't think of anything.
In that case, if one partner in a monogamous relationship dated someone else, and even kissed and cuddled, is it not cheating just because there's no sex with the third person? As much as I'd like to see people stop considering it as cheating, most monogamous people still do.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't get it. What makes the relationship romantic if there's nothing sexual to it? Isn't sex ultimately why romantic relationships are a thing, you know, to get to know someone before you open up sexually to them? What makes romance without the sex any different than a close friendship? Why not simply call it friendship then?

Well, as a female whose best friend is a sexual male, I can tell you that he has asked me the same question (I identify as hetero-romantic demi). I said that romance involves the extra bells and whistles that a simple close friendship doesn't have - the hand-holding, the snuggling, a makeout session here and there - not to mention the candy and flowers, etc. When I looked back at him, his jaw was on the floor. He said, 'So, you expect a guy to make all this effort to impress you and at the end of it, there's no payoff for him? Not even a hand job?"

So there you go. For people like us, whether you're Ace or Gray or Demi, romance is about connection and bonding, seeing one another as human beings. For sexuals, it's about objectification and a dishonest means to an end - something annoying that needs to be done as quickly as possibly in order to get laid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't get it. What makes the relationship romantic if there's nothing sexual to it? Isn't sex ultimately why romantic relationships are a thing, you know, to get to know someone before you open up sexually to them? What makes romance without the sex any different than a close friendship? Why not simply call it friendship then?

Answers in order of questions asked: Romance + Sex = Not always necessary. No. Romance & friendship are different, just go and try it on with any of your best mates, see what they say. See previous answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my. Let's see if I can't make this relatively simple. Full disclosure: I'm bisexual, not ace.

So, let's tackle this from several angles, because this isn't just an asexual problem, this is also a long-distance relationship problem, an ED problem, an STI problem.. if for any reason having sex with your spouse/significant other is a no-go, then you're not going to be able to define your romantic relationships as 'the ones involving sex.'

So, these people in relationships don't share things they wouldn't dare share with anyone else? kiss, cuddle, and stay together through everything?

Ultimately it's all about different level of closeness with that person, a friend is someone you know and you trust. Someone you like to spend time with and share interests with. A romantic partner is someone you feel very close to and (most likely) feel romantic attraction towards. Someone your willing to be that close to, able to trust that much. And then there's the actual romantic side, kissing, cuddling etc. Which of course I'd assume most people don't do with their friends casually. It's a statement about how much you love that person, that your willing to be in such a position where your closer, and more vulnerable to them. And you trust them for it.

And no, ask any asexual on this website, romantic relationships are not just a means to an end for sexual relationships.Even though is most sexual's it is sort of something that goes hand in hand with a relationship, but even in that situation they're side by side, not one in front of the other.

That still doesn't make it really any different than a close friendship. There are people who are simply close friends who those types of things and still have separate romantic lives.

Maybe, in the more Puritanical parts of America, there is a clear difference between friendship and sexless romance, but in other countries and in some of the more social diverse and liberated parts of America, there's no line at all.

"In the more social diverse and liberated parts of America", sex isn't exclusive at all.

There are friends I have sex with, and there are romantic companions I have sex with, and there are friends I don't have sex with, and there are romantic companions I don't have sex with. Obviously I can't define my relationships according to whether or not sex is involved. Ditto with love - I'm more highly attached to some of my friends than I have been with some of my romantic companions, and vice versa. So how do I categorize my relationships, if neither love nor sex can serve as identifiers? The difference is obvious for me - the relationships just feel different - but I'll try to put it into words.

With my present boyfriend, what marks him out as my romantic companion rather than a friend is a sense of self-identification with him, a blurring of the lines that mark us out as individuals. We are considered as a unit - a couple - rather than as 'two romantic companions.' Part of my identity is explicitly a reflection of my relationship with him - there's no special word to denote two friends as single unit, as a unified entity.

So, I would posit that the difference between a romantic and friendly relationship is the extent of identity fusion, which is customarily simulated/symbolized by the physical fusion of sexual intercourse, but not necessarily so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
98slbrookes98
Love, real love, is so much deeper than physicality. It's what pulls at your heart strings and emotions in ways a simple friendship never could.

To some people, sex is viewed as romantic, but there are so many different forms of romance. What about buying a boque of roses? What about writing love letters? What about kissing in the rain? Holding hands and watching the stars? 'Just friends' wouldn't do those things.

Exactly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kitty Spoon Train
I don't get it. What makes the relationship romantic if there's nothing sexual to it? Isn't sex ultimately why romantic relationships are a thing, you know, to get to know someone before you open up sexually to them? What makes romance without the sex any different than a close friendship? Why not simply call it friendship then?

Well, as a female whose best friend is a sexual male, I can tell you that he has asked me the same question (I identify as hetero-romantic demi). I said that romance involves the extra bells and whistles that a simple close friendship doesn't have - the hand-holding, the snuggling, a makeout session here and there - not to mention the candy and flowers, etc. When I looked back at him, his jaw was on the floor. He said, 'So, you expect a guy to make all this effort to impress you and at the end of it, there's no payoff for him? Not even a hand job?"

So there you go. For people like us, whether you're Ace or Gray or Demi, romance is about connection and bonding, seeing one another as human beings. For sexuals, it's about objectification and a dishonest means to an end - something annoying that needs to be done as quickly as possibly in order to get laid.

Heh, at first I thought the last paragraph sounded a bit judgmental and antisexual, but then I can see how it ties in with "'So, you expect a guy to make all this effort to impress you and at the end of it, there's no payoff for him? Not even a hand job?" ". :lol:

I've never really been able to comprehend that kind of game though. And whenever I see it in action I wonder how the heck it ever actually works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="DexM" data-cid="2297910" data-time="1355675746"><p>

Romance & friendship are different, just go and try it on with any of your best mates, see what they say. </p></blockquote>

Just the thought of doing that is ten kinds of EWH! :lol:

My job here is done ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

Each relationship is unique. People create what works for them. And they can call it whatever they want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, it's typically the sex that is exclusive. Without that, what else is there that would need to be exclusive that couldn't possibly be done with a friend? I can't think of anything.
In that case, if one partner in a monogamous relationship dated someone else, and even kissed and cuddled, is it not cheating just because there's no sex with the third person? As much as I'd like to see people stop considering it as cheating, most monogamous people still do.

I guess most people would have to see if it were sexually motivated to say whether or not it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh my. Let's see if I can't make this relatively simple. Full disclosure: I'm bisexual, not ace.

So, let's tackle this from several angles, because this isn't just an asexual problem, this is also a long-distance relationship problem, an ED problem, an STI problem.. if for any reason having sex with your spouse/significant other is a no-go, then you're not going to be able to define your romantic relationships as 'the ones involving sex.'

So, these people in relationships don't share things they wouldn't dare share with anyone else? kiss, cuddle, and stay together through everything?

Ultimately it's all about different level of closeness with that person, a friend is someone you know and you trust. Someone you like to spend time with and share interests with. A romantic partner is someone you feel very close to and (most likely) feel romantic attraction towards. Someone your willing to be that close to, able to trust that much. And then there's the actual romantic side, kissing, cuddling etc. Which of course I'd assume most people don't do with their friends casually. It's a statement about how much you love that person, that your willing to be in such a position where your closer, and more vulnerable to them. And you trust them for it.

And no, ask any asexual on this website, romantic relationships are not just a means to an end for sexual relationships.Even though is most sexual's it is sort of something that goes hand in hand with a relationship, but even in that situation they're side by side, not one in front of the other.

That still doesn't make it really any different than a close friendship. There are people who are simply close friends who those types of things and still have separate romantic lives.

Maybe, in the more Puritanical parts of America, there is a clear difference between friendship and sexless romance, but in other countries and in some of the more social diverse and liberated parts of America, there's no line at all.

"In the more social diverse and liberated parts of America", sex isn't exclusive at all.

There are friends I have sex with, and there are romantic companions I have sex with, and there are friends I don't have sex with, and there are romantic companions I don't have sex with. Obviously I can't define my relationships according to whether or not sex is involved. Ditto with love - I'm more highly attached to some of my friends than I have been with some of my romantic companions, and vice versa. So how do I categorize my relationships, if neither love nor sex can serve as identifiers? The difference is obvious for me - the relationships just feel different - but I'll try to put it into words.

With my present boyfriend, what marks him out as my romantic companion rather than a friend is a sense of self-identification with him, a blurring of the lines that mark us out as individuals. We are considered as a unit - a couple - rather than as 'two romantic companions.' Part of my identity is explicitly a reflection of my relationship with him - there's no special word to denote two friends as single unit, as a unified entity.

So, I would posit that the difference between a romantic and friendly relationship is the extent of identity fusion, which is customarily simulated/symbolized by the physical fusion of sexual intercourse, but not necessarily so.

For one, just because sex is lost, that doesn't mean it doesn't factor into the equation.

Secondly, how does feeling that type of closeness with them differ in any manner from close friendship? I am starting to get the feeling that most people don't really have close, true friends. I feel a similar attitude to which you alluded toward my best friend. Why is that? It's because he's my best friend. We're supposed to go hand-in-hand in perfect fraternity, or we couldn't call ourselves best friends.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...