Jump to content

Archived

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

Xenopsyche

For Sexuals - Sex or Celibacy

Recommended Posts

Xenopsyche

I'm still trying to figure out my relationship with sex, I'm not 100% sure where on the spectrum I lie, it could just be that I have a low sex drive as I do find some women visually appealing.

So, to help me figure out what the average sexual person feels about sex, or the lack thereof, in their lives I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question.

If you were forced to make a choice between never having sexual intercourse again or having sex but only with people you find physically unattractive, which would it be?

If you could expand on why you'd choose either option too that would be much appreciated.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Naosuu

Moving this topic from The Gray Area, Sex and Related Discussions to Sexual Partners, Friends and Allies.

Naosuu, The Gray Area moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stickstome2

I'd have sex. No questions asked. Because... Much of us still have that need to be desired. Now you may not want to cuddle with somebody who is unattractive , but if they want you for sex , you'd do it... It's a weird thing I know it, but sex unleashes a very energy that most of us cannot describe , but somehow know we need it. So the answer is SEX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NeoLord

I'd go for sex too. People I find unattractive become increasingly attractive the longer I go without sex :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanenas

I will gladly pick the life of celibacy ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Geo

It depends on HOW unattractive. If they are just kind of neutral I'd choose sex, maybe even if they were marginally ugly, but there is some kind of thresh hold where I'd no longer enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Einy

Well, the more I find the person's character appealling the more I find them physically attractive too. So the physical attractivness is kind of a relative concept. But I would still choose sex over celibacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rawren

If I was 100% unattracted to them I would choose celibacy, hands down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Down in Texas

Females are not usually turned on by sight. I know that I need an emotional bond with the person I plan on having sex with so looks are relative for me. Even not so good sex with my long term mate is still better than no sex however the harder I have to work to get him interested the less it is beginning to mean there may come a day when I decide it is not worth it but at age 61 I still go for sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

I'm still trying to figure out my relationship with sex, I'm not 100% sure where on the spectrum I lie, it could just be that I have a low sex drive as I do find some women visually appealing.

So, to help me figure out what the average sexual person feels about sex, or the lack thereof, in their lives I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question.

If you were forced to make a choice between never having sexual intercourse again or having sex but only with people you find physically unattractive, which would it be?

If you could expand on why you'd choose either option too that would be much appreciated.

:)

Depends on how unattractive they are. Even then, I'd still have some sexual interactions. I rarely have sex with people I'm super physically attracted to, so that doesn't really matter to me, but I definitely do not have sex with people who I find physically repulsive either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swim2thesun

I personally lay on the Asexual spectrum but I feel like if I were to ever be in a relationship with a sexual that I'd be more prone to be in an open relationship with them so they, if they really wanted to have sex, could do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harzel174

Given the choice, I'd choose to have sex with someone I found unattractive. It's more about the sensation than looks for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LolaH

How unattractive? Like do they smell? I'm I repulsed by them, or are they just visually neutral?

Eh, either way I'm gonna go with sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xenopsyche

Hmm interesting answers, thanks guys and gals. It wouldn't have occurred to me that people's usual "standards" would lower the longer they've been without sex.

For those asking how unattractive we're talking about, I mean people whom you'd never normally consider being with because of their physical appearance, not just people who are average looking or that you find mildly unattractive.

How unattractive? Like do they smell? I'm I repulsed by them, or are they just visually neutral?

Eh, either way I'm gonna go with sex.

Heh, that made me chuckle. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joesantus

Sheesh...be like having to choose between saving one of two of my children!

Chastity --- immediately followed by euthanasia!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trapped.within.limbo

Ive kept reading this and not answering, then coming back and not answering again.

I'm sexual, bisexual at that, and I'd take sex without attraction any day. Though I take no sex, with love, on top of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlackRose

Xeno, I'd at least consider having sex with almost anyone female, even without the other option being celibacy. I mean sex feels soooo good, so why not?

But yeah, I'd never give up sex just because the only people I could have sex with were unattractive. Going without sex is horrible, and unattractiveness is not a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata

This thread is a perfect illustration that sexual desire is more fundamental and important than sexual attraction for most sexuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone

This thread is a perfect illustration that sexual desire is more fundamental and important than sexual attraction for most sexuals.

I would say Aesthetic Attraction is a bit different, meaning I believe it's possible to want sex with someone without thinking they are good looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lady Girl

This thread is a perfect illustration that sexual desire is more fundamental and important than sexual attraction for most sexuals.

That's exactly what I've been thinking the whole time I've been watching and reading the posts! Aesthetic attraction may indeed be a stand alone attraction, but when it comes to sexual attraction it is most definitely a primary component. The OP asking about physical attraction leads me to believe that they were incorporating a few other of the "types of attraction" into the question as well...scent, physique, height and weight, and possibly even age to name a few. Much of that is indeed involved in what is considered typical sexual attraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Down in Texas

It is MY opinion and only mine that through the years I have seen more people that would not commonly be placed on the visual attractive list have the most giving and kind personality once you get to know them. Some put up a defensive behavior at first because they have been hurt so many times. Once you find why they have been hurt and get past it they give you more attention than you could have possible imagined.

I have also seen many who would easily be placed on the attractive list that do not have an attractive personality. It seems that they often think that their looks which have many of the opposite sex chasing them gives them the attitude that they can treat people badly and get away with it because of their looks. It sometimes seems as if they have the attitude that if this one wont put up with me then maybe the next one will.

So looks is not the only thing considered when looking for a mate or life long friend. Their behavior and treatment of the other person not always their companion but of other people in their circle of friends will show you what kind of person they are. There are the clinchers that stay around because someone always pays for everything as if buying friends or there are those that are there for the companionship. It only takes a small amount of time to see a persons real personality.

However none of the above shows you how they are sexually. But I would hope that a person looks for a blend of both to find the person they hope to spend the rest of their life with. This goes for both male and female personalities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joesantus

Heheheh...Xeno, perhaps you need to further clarify what you intend by "For those asking how unattractive we're talking about, I mean people whom you'd never normally consider being with because of their physical appearance, not just people who are average looking or that you find mildly unattractive."

I interpreted you to be employing an extreme dilemma to discover just how strongly a desire for sex demands gratification, so I interpreted you to mean someone who's appearance is not merely "not attractive" in a neutral sense, but whom I find physically repulsive.

Based on their combinations of looks and personality, I've found nearly all the women with whom I've become acquainted through my life to be at least "attractive enough" to be potential sexual partners. However... I do know two women who, although attractive enough to me personality-wise, are physically repulsive to me. The physical repulsion I've consistently experienced toward them extinguishes any and all sexual interest in me. My repulsion would prevent me from even becoming aroused, let alone achieving sexual gratification, with them. That's the "unattractive" I interpreted you meant for your dilemma.

Is my "extreme" interpretation along the lines you intended?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlackRose

Down in Texas, I think it's worth pointing out that not everyone is looking for "someone to spend the rest of their life with." That's a tall order! In general many people are just looking for someone who meets some of their needs now, not necessarily a lifelong partner.

joesantus, now I'm curious what made them so repulsive that you'd choose chastity. After a long time without sex, I'd think you could get aroused just by the thought of having sex, no matter how repulsive the person -- I know I would. And you could always choose positions where you didn't have to look at parts of them, blindfold yourself, have sex in the dark, or use a glory hole.

At least for me any sex would be better than no sex... just wondering what makes them so repulsive you couldn't even make use of their bodies for sexual release after a long time without sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Down in Texas

Black Rose. I know I come from a different generation. In ways i wish that I had been able to experience some of the freedoms that your generation has. However when I was growing up the while purpose of dating was to find a mate. There was no sex befor marriage thus part of my generations problems.

On the other hand to much freedom gives you so much freedom that you find pleasure in one area and not another, causing much concussion when you add personalities and sex and begin to look for your perfect match. ( which there is NO perfect anything, everyone has a flaw of some kind) This causes you trouble finding someone that fits all your expectations.

You also have to worry about diseases that could stop a lot of your pleasureable activities in sex if you end up with something that could be transmitted sexually.

So there are both advantages and disadvantages to both generations. We both have factors that can cause us both pleasure and pain. And one day you will most likely decide to take a mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lady Girl

I'm just going to try to pull this back onto the track. I haven't answered the question yet. I'm pretty sure that if I had to choose between celibacy or sex with someone I wasn't super sexually attracted to I would choose sex.

As a weird little side note...if I had to choose celibacy and a life with my husband or sex with someone to whom I'm sexually attracted (and lose my husband because of it), I choose celibacy and my husband. Based on this, I answered the original question as if I weren't married.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harzel174

I'm just going to try to pull this back onto the track. I haven't answered the question yet. I'm pretty sure that if I had to choose between celibacy or sex with someone I wasn't super sexually attracted to I would choose sex.

As a weird little side note...if I had to choose celibacy and a life with my husband or sex with someone to whom I'm sexually attracted (and lose my husband because of it), I choose celibacy and my husband. Based on this, I answered the original question as if I weren't married.

I feel like this echoes a lot of the sexuals here. Sex is a complex physical and emotional experience, not just a visual one, and we tend to go for a romp in the sheets with an array of goals: intimacy, human connection, feeling desired/validated, just plain old physical pleasure, fun, surrendering to passion/instinct, a release, etc. So unless the other person is genuinely repulsive (everyone has their dealbreakers), a lot of us would still choose sex because base attraction isn't conditional for meeting all of those goals.

But honest love trumps all. It's a complex life experience, and I'd put that far above the physical and emotional (especially since it reaches into those domains on its own, just not to the full extent). Hence why so many of us have chosen celibacy with our asexual partners, even if that's a hard choice to make sometimes. A life experience shapes who you are as a person.

Sex is ultimately just a vector - it's a means to an end. For sexuals (painting with broad strokes here) in a deep romantic relationship, it's a means of expression for all of the ways your partner makes you feel, along with influencing each other on a very base and vulnerable level. Acting on that primal need, that instinct, strips away the defenses we throw up to everyone else. Even if the sex is just for fun, doing it with someone you love lets each of you make the other feel good on a very personal level. Outside of romance, sex still offers this experience that's hard if not impossible to compare to anything else.

A lot of the frustration you see around here, I think, stems from a sense of being unable to use that means. Sex feels like the only vector for achieving or expressing all those things. But that doesn't mean sex is the only vector. It feels like it to us, but that's no statement on how it might feel to others. Not all sexuals feel that way - they can get all of those sensations perfectly fine through other means. Or maybe they aren't important entirely. Maybe sex and romance don't overlap at all. There's no right answer here. It's ultimately a matter of turning inward and discovering what sex and all of this other stuff means for you. Hopefully this is insightful for folks like the OP who are wrestling with the notion of sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lady Girl

I just want to say I really like the above post so, so much. Thank you Harzel for saying that so well...it explains what I feel in my heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pandante

Me too, I read the post three times because it's so well written! It is why I decided to marry my asexual partner. Thanks Harzel!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Goodlem

Sex with the repulsive person :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadRat

I knew I should avoid this section to the rest of my life… It scares me to the death that there are a lot of sexuals who would fu*k literally anything. I don´t get it. I´m gray asexual and I would never even consider having sex with anyone except very rare super hot and super nice guys. Even if I was in a relationship with super nice and super hot guy, I would still prefer sexless relationship.
The weirdest thing is, if sexual person could have sex only with unattractive people, it would put him/her into the same position as asexuals, who are not sexually attracted to their spouses. But even in that situation, sexual would prefer sex over masturbation, while asexuals would prefer no sex even if they love their partners very much. It quite disproves current definition of asexuality.
Sexuals often say they´re sorry for asexuals, but from my point of view, asexuals are blessed people. It must be Hell to be ruled by one´s sexuality and horniness so much that one would sleep even with a person who is repulsive. It´s so crazy and sad...
I felt quite safe because I´m not attractive and I thought that even someone very desperate and horny would hardly want to rape me. But it seems that for desperate sexual, looks stop to play any role. How the Hell could I feel safe in this world, when guys who try to fu*k me are almost exclusivelly typical desperate losers? Considering their level of their despair and horniness, they could be dangerous. Do I have to lock myself at home and never go anywhere alone even if I like to spend my time alone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...