Jump to content

On “sexual attraction” meaning and the difference between being asexual and non-asexual sex-repulsed


Green mouse ice-cream

Recommended Posts

Come on guys, if you have a preference for one genital part over the other that's sexual attraction. As I see it asexuals don't want to get involved with any genital parts.

That's not true because if it were no asexuals would be masturbating...and plenty do. Sexual attraction for most people involves people, not just body parts.

My point is for you to say asexuals don't want to get involved with any genital parts is not true...people who masturbate? Their own genitals are involved.

They are involved, but I've not heard that the asexuals on AVEN who masturbate are interested in their own genitals. They're just taking care of that urge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Attraction and desire are not necessarily about genitals. Attraction is usually about the person, the whole body, their personality, smile, gender, and so forth.

Many asexuals feel aesthetic/romantic attraction to others, which is just what you described above. It doesn't include genitals or genital activity.

I can feel sexual attraction to someone that isn't about genitals. It's different than the aesthetic or romantic attraction that many asexuals feel. Sexual attraction isn't always genital.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

Come on guys, if you have a preference for one genital part over the other that's sexual attraction. As I see it asexuals don't want to get involved with any genital parts.

That's not true because if it were no asexuals would be masturbating...and plenty do. Sexual attraction for most people involves people, not just body parts.

My point is for you to say asexuals don't want to get involved with any genital parts is not true...people who masturbate? Their own genitals are involved.

I'm not sexually attracted to myself, my body parts don't turn me on at all. I do it for sexual release. It seems sexuals do get turned on by a penis or vagina, I don't. I don't even say "I'd tap myself" but sexuals do say that for who they are sexually attracted to. Why does penis size matter so much if genitals don't matter to sexuals?

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

.

Attraction and desire are not necessarily about genitals. Attraction is usually about the person, the whole body, their personality, smile, gender, and so forth.

Many asexuals feel aesthetic/romantic attraction to others, which is just what you described above. It doesn't include genitals or genital activity.

I can feel sexual attraction to someone that isn't about genitals. It's different than the aesthetic or romantic attraction that many asexuals feel. Sexual attraction isn't always genital.

Care to explain? I'm curious about this besides your own sexual desire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Attraction and desire are not necessarily about genitals. Attraction is usually about the person, the whole body, their personality, smile, gender, and so forth.

Many asexuals feel aesthetic/romantic attraction to others, which is just what you described above. It doesn't include genitals or genital activity.

I can feel sexual attraction to someone that isn't about genitals. It's different than the aesthetic or romantic attraction that many asexuals feel. Sexual attraction isn't always genital.

I was describing what type of attraction asexuals can feel -- the only type.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

So pansexual then? Because pansexuality is like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

I don't think that anyone said that sexual attraction is ONLY about genitals -- certainly I didn't say that. But what is generally true is that whatever attraction an asexual feels is NOT about genitals, and it does NOT lead to a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire with another person.

I feel like we're going around in a circle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

I don't think that anyone said that sexual attraction is ONLY about genitals -- certainly I didn't say that. But what is generally true is that whatever attraction an asexual feels is NOT about genitals, and it does NOT lead to a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire with another person.

I feel like we're going around in a circle.

I agree. Genitals are out of the picture for asexuals. It seems like that is a big difference between asexuals and sexuals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sexually attracted to myself, my body parts don't turn me on at all. I do it for sexual release. It seems sexuals do get turned on by a penis or vagina, I don't. I don't even say "I'd tap myself" but sexuals do say that for who they are sexually attracted to. Why does penis size matter so much if genitals don't matter to sexuals?

Genitals frequently do matter to sexuals. But sexual attraction isn't just about genitals. Usually sexual attraction starts when you see someone or talk to them, before you see their genitals or even know what type of genitals they have.

I can feel sexual attraction to someone that isn't about genitals. It's different than the aesthetic or romantic attraction that many asexuals feel. Sexual attraction isn't always genital.

Care to explain? I'm curious about this besides your own sexual desire.

Sure, what specifically do you want me to explain? Say I see someone I feel sexual attraction towards... it's like I just start thinking about sex, might feel turned on, might feel desire. I'd probably hope they have a vagina and would be disappointed if they have a penis.

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

Yeah, agreed. Genitals make me think about and feel desire, but they have nothing to do with attraction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I'm not sexually attracted to myself, my body parts don't turn me on at all. I do it for sexual release. It seems sexuals do get turned on by a penis or vagina, I don't. I don't even say "I'd tap myself" but sexuals do say that for who they are sexually attracted to. Why does penis size matter so much if genitals don't matter to sexuals?

Genitals frequently do matter to sexuals. But sexual attraction isn't just about genitals. Usually sexual attraction starts when you see someone or talk to them, before you see their genitals or even know what type of genitals they have.

I can feel sexual attraction to someone that isn't about genitals. It's different than the aesthetic or romantic attraction that many asexuals feel. Sexual attraction isn't always genital.

Care to explain? I'm curious about this besides your own sexual desire.

Sure, what specifically do you want me to explain? Say I see someone I feel sexual attraction towards... it's like I just start thinking about sex, might feel turned on, might feel desire. I'd probably hope they have a vagina and would be disappointed if they have a penis.

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

Yeah, agreed. Genitals make me think about and feel desire, but they have nothing to do with attraction.

What part of someone is making you think about sex with them? How's this attraction different than just them looking good (Aesthetic Attraction)? Also why would you be disappointed if they had a penis?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

So pansexual then? Because pansexuality is like that.

No, not pansexual. Some sexual people can find genitals mildly or even more than mildly unattractive and still have the desire for sex...the whole experience of being with another person sexually. That's where I'm coming from. I have a basic desire for sex. My sexual attraction is based on wanting sexual interaction with a person I find aesthetically, intellectually, and romantically appealing. I don't find genitals that appealing...they just happen to be how you have the sexual interaction. I almost find them repulsive by themselves I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

So pansexual then? Because pansexuality is like that.

No, not pansexual. Some sexual people can find genitals mildly or even more than mildly unattractive and still have the desire for sex...the whole experience of being with another person sexually. That's where I'm coming from. I have a basic desire for sex. My sexual attraction is based on wanting sexual interaction with a person I find aesthetically, intellectually, and romantically appealing. I don't find genitals that appealing...they just happen to be how you have the sexual interaction. I almost find them repulsive by themselves I think.

This makes some sense. So would you say the thought of having sex with someone is just your desire and not them being sexually attractive to you? What makes someone more sexually attractive to sexuals if it's just desire for sex?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

So pansexual then? Because pansexuality is like that.

No, not pansexual. Some sexual people can find genitals mildly or even more than mildly unattractive and still have the desire for sex...the whole experience of being with another person sexually. That's where I'm coming from. I have a basic desire for sex. My sexual attraction is based on wanting sexual interaction with a person I find aesthetically, intellectually, and romantically appealing. I don't find genitals that appealing...they just happen to be how you have the sexual interaction. I almost find them repulsive by themselves I think.

This makes some sense. So would you say the thought of having sex with someone is just your desire and not them being sexually attractive to you? What makes someone more sexually attractive to sexuals if it's just desire for sex?

Rapport for me. That's how it starts anyway...being in sync, on the same wavelength, a feeling of trust and affinity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I guess I'm being picky about how things are phrased. For some reason, genitals being equal to sexual attraction is so far from my idea of it that it almost freaks me out. It practically seems ludicrous to be honest. To me, sexual attraction is about a connection with a person that could develop into a situation that would involve satisfying sexual desire.

So pansexual then? Because pansexuality is like that.
No, not pansexual. Some sexual people can find genitals mildly or even more than mildly unattractive and still have the desire for sex...the whole experience of being with another person sexually. That's where I'm coming from. I have a basic desire for sex. My sexual attraction is based on wanting sexual interaction with a person I find aesthetically, intellectually, and romantically appealing. I don't find genitals that appealing...they just happen to be how you have the sexual interaction. I almost find them repulsive by themselves I think.
This makes some sense. So would you say the thought of having sex with someone is just your desire and not them being sexually attractive to you? What makes someone more sexually attractive to sexuals if it's just desire for sex?
Rapport for me. That's how it starts anyway...being in sync, on the same wavelength, a feeling of trust and affinity.

I would say besides my lack of desire for sex I'm not too interesting in seeing or touching someone else's parts. I'm just not interested in nudes. I feel there is some level that makes you want sex with someone that I don't experience, something that makes you see yourself having sex with. I don't even have the thoughts let alone a need for sex.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I see. I guess I don't really feel much then in what you said there. I understand longing for company like other asexuals but not the sex part.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What part of someone is making you think about sex with them? How's this attraction different than just them looking good (Aesthetic Attraction)? Also why would you be disappointed if they had a penis?

Usually it's their face, voice, or smile. Eyes, especially if they're wearing eyeliner. Sometimes their waist or ass, especially if they're in tight or revealing clothing. If they seem into me, that makes me think about it and makes me more likely to be into them. There's a sort of playful, fun, naughty, flirtatious feeling about it... just an excitement that goes beyond someone looking good. Sort of like a shiver of energy.

I'd be disappointed because I'm not really into penises. I really like vaginas and they feel really good to have sex with. It would be like seeing and smelling a delicious hamburger, taking a bite, and realizing it's actually a veggie burger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really picture it either. For me it's more about how it makes me feel (emotionally and physically).

Besides feeling like I was pleasing my partner, sex had absolutely no emotional feeling for me -- ever -- and the physical feeling was of the kind that I was very glad it was over, and not looking forward to the next time (which would come only too soon).

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

What part of someone is making you think about sex with them? How's this attraction different than just them looking good (Aesthetic Attraction)? Also why would you be disappointed if they had a penis?

Usually it's their face, voice, or smile. Eyes, especially if they're wearing eyeliner. Sometimes their waist or ass, especially if they're in tight or revealing clothing. If they seem into me, that makes me think about it and makes me more likely to be into them. There's a sort of playful, fun, naughty, flirtatious feeling about it... just an excitement that goes beyond someone looking good. Sort of like a shiver of energy.

I'd be disappointed because I'm not really into penises. I really like vaginas and they feel really good to have sex with. It would be like seeing and smelling a delicious hamburger, taking a bite, and realizing it's actually a veggie burger.

This is interesting but I don't experience any of this. Something may make me like someone more as a person but not in a way that I would want to have sex with them. And as I remember a penis didn't do much for me. Penetration didn't seem interesting to me as a kid.

I feel what you said is more sexual attraction than your own desires though, as to what turns you on sexually with another person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sexual attraction, and that can then turn me on, and then I might desire them. It's a sequence: attraction -> arousal -> desire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

I think because it turns to sexual desire for sexuals it's sexual attraction, but it isn't that same attraction for asexuals who don't get that desire. We see it differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if it didn't turn to desire, it would still be sexual and I'd still feel that shiver of excitement. Like, I'm really attracted to a friend of mine, who is engaged to another good friend. The attraction is there, but I don't get aroused or desire her, because I know she's off limits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata

This makes some sense. So would you say the thought of having sex with someone is just your desire and not them being sexually attractive to you? What makes someone more sexually attractive to sexuals if it's just desire for sex?

Rapport for me. That's how it starts anyway...being in sync, on the same wavelength, a feeling of trust and affinity.

That's pretty similar to how cuddling works for me. I have a general desire for cuddles, but I only want to share them with certain people - people who share a deep intellectual and emotional connection (usually with some romantic twist) with me. I don't call it "sensual attraction", because I'm attracted to the whole person, and my desire to cuddle with them is a response to this attraction. This is how I understand sexual people's desire to have sex with certain individuals. When I compare cuddling for me and sex for my sexual partner, I don't really see a difference in the attraction part - we're both attracted to a combination of a person's personality, mind, physical appearance, etc., but the difference is I only want non-sexual touch with the person, whereas he also wants sex. It's because he has an innate desire for sex but I don't. That's why the desire-based model makes more sense to me.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sexual attraction, and that can then turn me on, and then I might desire them. It's a sequence: attraction -> arousal -> desire.

I would say you are demi-sexual because of this.

IMO for a sexual person desire is just there, it doesn't have any prerequisites.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

At this point I'm just going to say that what asexuals feel on here is what we feel. We don't see it as sexual so it's best to just respect what we say even if it doesn't make sense to you. There's a difference between Aesthetic Attraction and Sexual Attraction for us.

But we can keep going in circles if anyone wants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes some sense. So would you say the thought of having sex with someone is just your desire and not them being sexually attractive to you? What makes someone more sexually attractive to sexuals if it's just desire for sex?

Rapport for me. That's how it starts anyway...being in sync, on the same wavelength, a feeling of trust and affinity.

That's pretty similar to how cuddling works for me. I have a general desire for cuddles, but I only want to share them with certain people - people who share a deep intellectual and emotional connection (usually with some romantic twist) with me. I don't call it "sensual attraction", because I'm attracted to the whole person, and my desire to cuddle with them is a response to this attraction. This is how I understand sexual people's desire to have sex with certain individuals. When I compare cuddling for me and sex for my sexual partner, I don't really see a difference in the attraction part - we're both attracted to a combination of a person's personality, mind, physical appearance, etc., but the difference is I only want non-sexual touch with the person, whereas he also wants sex. It's because he has an innate desire for sex but I don't. That's why the desire-based model makes more sense to me.

I don't think it's the same attraction. It's a different feeling. With some people I might feel sexually attracted, with others I might feel attracted but it's not sexual.

Desire is a separate thing. I feel desire when I'm turned on, which can happen for any number of reasons or no reason at all.

And, finally, I can want to have sex with someone even when I feel no attraction OR desire. Why would I want it? Because I know sex feels good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sexual attraction, and that can then turn me on, and then I might desire them. It's a sequence: attraction -> arousal -> desire.

I would say you are demi-sexual because of this.

IMO for a sexual person desire is just there, it doesn't have any prerequisites.

That made me smile. I'm definitely not demi, but thank you :) *cake*

I pretty much always want sex with anyone female, but I don't always feel desire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel a definition with "and/or" would be best to please everyone.

And that's a view/suggestion you'd find me completely agreeing on, too. :cake:

I agree as well. I acknowledge problems with the word "desire", particularly since this is a site with many non-native English speakers and people from different backgrounds. While most any of us automatically understand the difference between an innate desire and a conscious decision (ie, I don't like tomatoes but I choose to eat them for health reasons), I personally have no interest in spending every other month endlessly describing the difference to people who either don't have a firm grasp on English or who have a hearty bend toward the literal. So, as a practical issue I think the and/or suggestion is best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Green mouse ice-cream
I can't help but think we're overcomplicating this A LOT. I've come to the realization that all my concerns revolve around this problematic "sexual attraction" thing and I'm better off just ignoring it. Anyway, it's more than questionable that "sexual people" experience it, not to mention that we don't get to agree a proper definition. Honestly, I fail to see how it is of any use.
So, please, let's keep it simple: does everyone agree with the following points?:
-Asexuals don't inherently want partnered sex, though they may have a libido that can be taken care of through masturbation.
Asexuals don't desire to fuck other people. It's that simple. And here's when someone says: wait, but some asexuals do engage in partnered sexual activity, are you saying they aren't asexual?
No, I'm not saying that. They can make the conscious choice of engaging in sexual activity for various reasons but still, they don't "really" want it. Say, as Skullery pointed out, maybe you are not a big tomato fan, but you may eat it because your doctor prescribed you so, or because your granny made a salad for you and you think it would be ungrateful not to eat it or whatever. You don't particularly want the tomato which doesn't mean that you hate it (you may even enjoy the taste), but you don't need it, you could live a happy tomato-free life and you wouldn't feel like there's something missing. There's no voice in your head, no itchy feeling in your tongue or stomach screaming: "I'm craving for some tomato".
-Sexual people desire partnered sex. Some of them prefer their sexual partners to be tall or small, blond, ginger, smart, female or male and there are all kinds of fancy labels to name some of these preferences. The fact still remains that "sexual" people want to have sex with other people. However, some "sexuals" make the conscious choice not to do so in the same way that people following a diet may not eat a chocolate pie.
Wanna fuck someone?
Yes. -->Non-asexual (though it's possible to want it and decide not to act upon it and that's called celibacy)
No--> Asexual (though it's possible not to desire it and still engage in partnered sex for other reasons)
If everyone agrees with this, why do we need the "sexual attraction" definition?
And, if you don't agree, for Zeus sake: WHY?

I think it's super interesting to hear people say they lack something and tell the people who don't lack it what "it" is.

This. I insist: I opened this thread because I didn't know what sexual attraction was and honestly I'm still clueless. Now I'm not even sure that it "exists" as a real thing, at least not in the way AVEN defines it. The concept seems confussing and rather idiotic to me and now it turns out that some sexuals think the same... and they are supposed to be the ones feeling sexual attraction! I give up: no idea about this sexual attraction stuff. I only know that I'm attracted to people in different ways for various reasons but I don't desire sex with them. And that's it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...