What Do You Think? Am I Being Unrealistic?

[Slizzy26]

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/64211-am-i-being-unrealistic/

I posted this topic back in 2011 in Asexual Relationships. I talked about my ideal relationship form, which comes down to, as another poster put it, "something between friendship and romance - a sort of semi-romantic best friendship, maybe." I describe it in more detail in my post.

When I posted this in Asexual Relationships, the feedback I got was very positive and encouraging However I want to know from your (sexual) point of view, if you think this is unrealistic or not.

Thank you in advance for taking the time to read my post and reply. Any advice you could offer would be much appreciated.

Here is the full text of the original post:

I've known I was asexual for a while, though I didn't formally discover "asexuality" until about six months ago. Since joining AVEN, I have realized that not only am I asexual, I am aromatic as well as biromantic, so bi-aromantic? Since then, I've been learning about asexuality and every day I feel more and more comfortable with it, and I feel that asexuality really does describe me. I've been thinking about the kind of relationships I would like to have, you know--what an asexual relationship looks like for me.

This is my ideal relationship form:

Romantic--as in we like to spend time getting to know each other and spending time together--not necessarily dating, though very similar. I really dislike the term of boyfriend/girlfriend. I feel that using these labels puts pressure on the relationship to move faster than natural. For example, I had one relationship where, no soon as I said I would go out with this guy he started calling me "baby" "sweetie" and "honey." He also started calling me all the time asking what "I'm thinking about" and all that stuff. It felt really uncomfortable. Not because he was doing it, but because it felt like he was doing it because he was supposed to since we were dating and not because he genuinely had me on his mind and wanted to get to know me better. I would love to just take my time getting to know someone.

I would also want to keep any displays of affection private, because I am a private person. I don't feel I need much physical 'attention' (for lack of a better word) in a relationship, and I don't think it's anyone else business who I am in a relationship with, that I should display my affections to the public. In private however, I am not opposed to kissing, I love to cuddle and the feeling of being held. I also like having my body touched gently in certain ways. For example, my bf/gf lightly holding my butt when we cuddle or holding my breast. Just holding. It feels nice. lol

But basically, ideally I would just spend time getting to know a person, going out, talking on the phone, skype, etc, without the pressures of a "physical relationship" and without the titles of a romantic relationship.

What do you think?

[Guest]

Why should it be unrealistic? You seem to want a type of relationship that many other people would want, myself included. The only thing is that you don't feel alright with public displays of affection, which is perfectly normal. Even some sexuals prefer to be intimate only in private, it's not an asexual thing at all.

I like the term "romantic partner" better than "boy/girlfriend", but I'm fine with those as well, and I'm fine with other people knowing about my relationship - I will more than likely be the one to tell my close friends and family. Actually, I'm fine with physical displays of affection even in public too, although I do prefer them to happen in private. But yes, I also have a pet peeve with terms like "sweetie" or "my man" and all that. "Dear" and "darling" are cute, but most other endearingly "romantic" terms sound a bit too mushy to me :P

[Slizzy26]

Why should it be unrealistic? You seem to want a type of relationship that many other people would want, myself included. The only thing is that you don't feel alright with public displays of affection, which is perfectly normal. Even some sexuals prefer to be intimate only in private, it's not an asexual thing at all.

I like the term "romantic partner" better than "boy/girlfriend", but I'm fine with those as well, and I'm fine with other people knowing about my relationship - I will more than likely be the one to tell my close friends and family. Actually, I'm fine with physical displays of affection even in public too, although I do prefer them to happen in private. But yes, I also have a pet peeve with terms like "sweetie" or "my man" and all that. "Dear" and "darling" are cute, but most other endearingly "romantic" terms sound a bit too mushy to me :P

That is good to hear that there are some non-sexuals who would be comfortable in, if not desire a relationship structure like the one I described. I've been thinking a lot about what terms I would most prefer, and right now I would prefer friend, but to differentiate, I would prefer "special friend."

[Guest]

I actually want a romantic relationship, in that I care about it being "official" and known to our friends and all. That's about it, though. I'm not very much into the mushy stuff - nice if it's there, in the right dosage, but that's it.

I'd be willing to have a relationship even with someone who didn't consider it romantic in nature, if they want the same type of commitment that I do: monogamy, living together, being physically affectionate, that sort of thing.

[Lady Girl]

I don't think it's unreasonable to want what you want. I do think that sometimes when you begin to love someone and choose to be with them in a different kind of relationship than friends, you have to temper some expectations and perhaps even adjust to each other's expectations. I guess what I'm trying to say is don't let your hopes and dreams rule you...if someone comes into your life, maybe they will be something in between the calling you 'baby' and 'sweetie pie' guy and what you have in mind as your Prince Charming and that might be the perfect match in the end.

[Slizzy26]

I don't think it's unreasonable to want what you want. I do think that sometimes when you begin to love someone and choose to be with them in a different kind of relationship than friends, you have to temper some expectations and perhaps even adjust to each other's expectations. I guess what I'm trying to say is don't let your hopes and dreams rule you...if someone comes into your life, maybe they will be something in between the calling you 'baby' and 'sweetie pie' guy and what you have in mind as your Prince Charming and that might be the perfect match in the end.

I agree. I think that while my orientation will not change, if I am 100% comfortable in my relationship I may be willing to try different things, not just physically but also in the way the relationship is structured; I might even try some light PDA...of course I might not. However, I understand and agree with your point and I appreciate your input.

I have a follow up question: if I were dating someone and things were going well and it felt like it might start to get more serious, when (if at all) would be a good time to talk about my preference for the type of relationship described above? If someone told you that, about their relational preferences would you be put off? Any input is much appreciated.

I actually want a romantic relationship, in that I care about it being "official" and known to our friends and all. That's about it, though. I'm not very much into the mushy stuff - nice if it's there, in the right dosage, but that's it.

I'd be willing to have a relationship even with someone who didn't consider it romantic in nature, if they want the same type of commitment that I do: monogamy, living together, being physically affectionate, that sort of thing.

I understand what you are saying and that is good to hear. At this point this is exactly the type of relationship I am comfortable having (I'm not looking for it but I'm not turning it down either). I have some questions for you regarding your answer.

If you were in a non-romantic relationship with a person, would you still use romantic terms to describe it, such as "boyfriend/girlfriend/partner, etc? Also, At what point in dating someone would you have the conversation about ideal relationship structure to know that they did not want a romantic relationship, but still wanted a committed relationship? Also, would you be able to seek sex outside of the relationship since it is not romantic or does that contradict the monogamy of it?

I apologize for all the questions, I'm just really interested in your point of view.

[Guest]

No apologising, I like answering questions. In fact, I'll steal the one you just asked to LG too. :P

I have a follow up question: if I were dating someone and things were going well and it felt like it might start to get more serious, when (if at all) would be a good time to talk about my preference for the type of relationship described above? If someone told you that, about their relational preferences would you be put off? Any input is much appreciated.

IMHO, the sooner the better. I would never enter a relationship with someone who didn't know what my relationship preferences were. Granted, I don't need to tell people much of anything other than the fact that I'm asexual and want the relationship to be sexless, because as far as everything else goes, what I want is considered a "classic romantic relationship" by most people.

If you were in a non-romantic relationship with a person, would you still use romantic terms to describe it, such as "boyfriend/girlfriend/partner, etc? Also, At what point in dating someone would you have the conversation about ideal relationship structure to know that they did not want a romantic relationship, but still wanted a committed relationship? Also, would you be able to seek sex outside of the relationship since it is not romantic or does that contradict the monogamy of it?

I wouldn't be in a non-romantic relationship. Apologies if it wasn't clear from my last post. What I mean is that yes, I do care about my partner agreeing on a romantic relationship, although what defines a romantic relationship is debatable. For me, it's living together, being monogamous, physically affectionate and a number of other (smaller) things. This is what I call romantic. If the other person also wants the same things, but don't consider them romantic, YET they are still willing to be in a romantic relationship with me, I'm fine with that. Where's the difference if we both want the same things? Just in the name, really. I don't really know why I care about personally acknowledging the relationship as romantic, either. I just do. But all that matters for me is that the other party acknowledges my romantic feelings and my way of seeing the relationship in its entirety, and not only respects, but also embraces that. It's all psychological though, because in practical terms they don't need to do anything other than what they already do and want from the relationship in its whole.

I'm probably not getting my point across here, am I? Well, anyway, I would prefer to be with a romantic person, or a person who wants a romantic relationship anyway, even if they're aromantic and their feelings aren't romantic in nature - it'd be simpler to come to an agreement on the relationship in itself for us both.

So, back to the question - yes, I would still use terms that I consider romantic. "Romantic partner", more specifically, since I don't fancy how binary "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" are. I may call my SO a number of other names, though, such as "sweetheart" or "significant other" and other things like that. It also depends on how they like to be called best!

As I've answered before, I would have "the talk" about relationship structure long before beginning the relationship, because if I don't like the way things are going I'd rather back off before initiating anything than mid-way. Saves both parties from a lot of potential hurt, in my opinion. But that's just me being a radical. :P As I said I normally say that I'm asexual and that's it.

I don't think sexual exclusivity is necessary in every relationship, but I personally want it. I don't want my partner to be with anyone other than me, sexually or otherwise. (I also don't want to date people who aren't from the asexual spectrum though, so that should simplify things.)

[Notte stellata]

So basically your ideal relationship boils down to: 1) not a "romantic relationship" in its conventional sense; 2) no PDA.

I'd be totally fine with 1) - not only fine, but I actually prefer the idea of "semiromantic best friend" (which I read from your old thread) over a conventional romantic relationship. It sounds quite close to a romantic friendship, which is my ideal type of relationship - a deep friendship at its core, with some romantic twist, but without any pressure or expectation for anything "more". I'd feel weird to call each other boyfriend and girlfriend in such a relationship. "SO" or "special friend" is much better.

As for 2), I personally enjoy a moderate amount of PDA, but I can live without it as long as my SO is okay with physical affection in private. Plus, I don't go out very often anyway. :D

At what point in dating someone would you have the conversation about ideal relationship structure to know that they did not want a romantic relationship, but still wanted a committed relationship?

I'd make my relationship preference and ideology very clear as soon as possible, even before (or at least as soon as) we're showing mutual interest in having something "more than friendship". No point in wasting each other's time or leading them on.

Also, would you be able to seek sex outside of the relationship since it is not romantic or does that contradict the monogamy of it?

I'm polyamorous, so all my relationships have to be emotionally and sexually nonexclusive. Monogamy and romantic don't have to go hand in hand. You can have a monogamous nonromantic relationship or a nonmonogamous romantic relationship. It all depends on what you're comfortable with.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

I don't think this is unrealistic at all. Nothing much is really. For every unconventional combination of relationship desires that people can have, surely there's someone else out there who can fit in somewhere in there with you. It's a big world. :)

That said, the more unconventional you are, the smaller the "dating pool" that's available to you. That's pretty much a given of course. It's something I struggle with too, but it's just how it is. Life is largely a numbers game in many ways, and the further you are from the fat bit of the bell curve about anything - the more difficult it will be to find something that fits.

Not sure I have any other specific advice really. Except that you should be as open and honest as possible about what you're looking for - and the fact that it's not quite mainstream. Trying to bend people in your direction (while dating them and pretending to be "normal") is sneaky and kinda unethical, and ultimately usually ends in all-round disappointment anyway.

Of course, there are always some compromises in relationships and no two people are a perfect match (despite what Disney and Hollywood tell you). But when it comes to big things it's best not to try to sneak them. Better to work with the huge noise-to-signal ratio honestly, and take your time to find someone who's truly on the same page.

[Arctangent]

I'm not sexual, but my ideal relationship forms are similar to yours and could also be described as "semi-romantic best friendship." I don't think it's unrealistic, no, but I can relate to feeling that it is. When your relationship desires differ significantly from the norm, it's easy to feel like they're unrealistic. In my experience, discussions of relationships that fall between romance and friendship are rare in mainstream circles, and when they do occur, they often aren't exactly favorable (e.g. when people talk about "pseudo-dating"). Alongside the fact that such relationships are typically not very visible, this can be pretty discouraging, and in the past I have wondered if I'm being too idealistic in thinking along those lines.

I eventually realized, though, that regardless of how unrealistic it might seem on the surface, I think it's still what's most realistic for me. So, I'm sticking to it. Besides, because of my temperament, it doesn't make sense for me to compromise by having a conventional romantic relationship - I'd rather be "single," and I'm fine with that possibility. Once I found out that there are other people who think the same way and that these types of relationships do, in fact, exist, a lot of my concerns over whether my ideal relationships were unrealistic faded. Perhaps they're not very common, but they're out there. It has helped me a lot to focus on what I want and why I want it, without getting too caught up in probabilities. :)

[Lady Girl]

I have a follow up question: if I were dating someone and things were going well and it felt like it might start to get more serious, when (if at all) would be a good time to talk about my preference for the type of relationship described above? If someone told you that, about their relational preferences would you be put off? Any input is much appreciated.

I think the best time to tell them might be when it seems most appropriate. Like if it's something on your mind and you can't stop thinking about when to tell them, then sooner rather than later is most appropriate. If you haven't even been thinking about it, then the best time might be when the two of you are talking about expectations or things you "used to consider a must" but found you could live without.

I would definitely say there is the way we think things will be in our heads and then the reality of what we live. The two sort of overlap...like when you plan to say something to someone, if it's too rehearsed sometimes it's a disaster, but if you have a general plan it goes a little better. I think part of that is because in the rehearsed version the other party must respond a certain way for it to continue the way you want. In real life people don't generally use the script you write for them. I hope that makes sense and answers the question.