Willing Sexual Compromise is not Abuse

[Hermetess]

With the right partner I would most likely compromise as far as having sex in our relationship. The biggest thing I struggle with is feeling comfortable saying no and not feeling guilty for that.

[brainburst]

Frankly I can't believe that this is a topic. I suppose that there are probably militant asexuals out there that insist any sexual activity is tantamount to forceable rape. Uggh. This is very simple really. If I do something physical for my wife and she derives pleasure from it it doesn't matter if I derive pleasure from it. Ex: I give my wife foot rubs and massages. I derive no pleasure from this other than satisfaction that it makes her happy. It doesn't make a difference whether the pleasure she derives is non sexual or sexual.
If an asexual does something that pleasures the partner so what? Consider it a good foot rub or a massage. As long as there is no emotional blackmail or other stress it should be all good.

[Mycroft is Yourcroft]

Very controvrsial issue. On one hand it isn't but from the other it could be because it's forcing oneself to do things you don't like.

This is where it can get murky, but let me see if I can explain.

If a couple sits down and talks about what they're both okay and not okay with, this is compromise. If the asexual in the partnership is agreeing, verbally, to do x, y, and z, and to try d, e and f, this is compromise.

If a couple does not sit down and talk, but the sexual partner of the couple just expects the asexual partner to conform to their needs, this can then be termed as abuse (if the asexual partner feels that it is abuse).

Compromise requires consent. It cannot be abuse if there is consent.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on this. My ex partner didn't sit down with me and discuss what he wanted, expected, needed, but then neither did I. This was before I knew I was asexual, and so I compromised many times thinking I'd grow into it or something (I was 16 at the time). The issue that I had later was defining whether what I had been giving was 'consent' or 'lack of saying no', since mostly what I'd do when he started wanting something was grumble and gripe and say 'Really?' to which he always said 'yeeeees' and we'd do it. I did it because, while I found it boring and gross, I knew he wanted it, and I wanted him to be happy.

I was more interested in trying to be 'the most wonderful girlfriend ever' than actually thinking about what I wanted from him. Anyway, when I found out I was Ace, he couldn't take it, so I broke up with him at last. Some people may consider what happened to be consensual sex, not abuse, but it certainly never felt like that to me, and did nothing for my already troubled emotional well-being at the time.

Point I'm trying to make is, is 'consent' meant to be 'enthusiastic' and/or 'completely beyond the realm of all doubt'? Does what I gave count as 'consent'?

[Percivel]

Consent simply means "permission" and "willing". We do all kinds of things for people that we don't "like" doing but we do them anyway. Doing something you don't like doing for your partner is an act of love. Wanting/asking your partner to do something for you that they don't like doing, within their moral code, is part of any relationship? Sex/intimacy...is expected by most to be a part of married life. The regular refusal of sex in a marriage is considered by many to be abusive......and just cause for divorce.

[Guest]

Consent simply means "permission" and "willing". We do all kinds of things for people that we don't "like" doing but we do them anyway. Doing something you don't like doing for your partner is an act of love. Wanting/asking your partner to do something for you that they don't like doing, within their moral code, is part of any relationship? Sex/intimacy...is expected by most to be a part of married life. The regular refusal of sex in a marriage is considered by many to be abusive......and just cause for divorce.

Saying no is NOT abusive. Lying, manipulating, putting a person down for wanting sex, etc is abusive. But, saying no because you don't want to is NEVER abusive. No one, not even a spouse, is entitled to sex. Ever. Period. People should be honest about not wanting sex if they know they don't, before a relationship. You shouldn't trick a sexual into a relationship and then deny sex. Some people don't know though when they enter into relationships, especially if they've never had sex before and just assume they will like it when they try it. So, not every mixed relationship where a sexual didn't know means the asexual knew. Sometimes it's just a sucky situation two people are in. Visibility will help stop that. Education that some people don't want sex and it's OK to not will help prevent some of those very sucky situations.

But, to say the asexual HAS to say yes, even if it is traumatic and hurts them or they are abusing someone? Just no. The sexual is able to walk away if they aren't satisfied, the asexual is able to walk away if they feel pressured. Not wanting something your partner wants and refusing to hurt yourself to please them is not abusive. My partner not watching musicals with me is not abusive. My partner not wanting to get to know my family is not abusive. My partner not liking to cuddle is not abusive. These are all things I would LIKE for him to do, especially the cuddling, but it's not abusive for him to say no even if it hurts me or I feel rejected for it. That is MY problem, I have no right to force him to do ANYTHING he doesn't want to do. He has no right to force me to have sex if it would hurt me. Me saying no would not be abusive (I say yes, because it doesn't hurt me, but not everyone is as neutral to sex as I am).

But, yes, it is just cause for divorce. If you are not happy in a relationship, it is just cause for divorce. If your partner cannot provide something you need, it is just cause for divorce. 100% agree there. :)

Mycroft - Consent is when you tell a person it's OK to do something. Your response of "REALLY?" makes your consent not clear. I have had sex because I felt I had to and it does NOT feel good. But, I didn't let the guys know that so I can't hold it against them. I said OK to it, even if it was a grudging "Ok, but lets make it quick", I was still consenting to them. Societal pressure to have sex was the reason, but it wasn't their fault I felt alone, broken and felt like I needed to do it anyway and maybe one day I would magically be fixed from it, or if I tried enough sexual stuff I would find the thing I like. I can't call them rapists for accepting the yes, even if I didn't really want to give the yes. They didn't know not wanting sex was even a thing. Neither did I, I thought there was something wrong with me. Society said everyone likes sex, society said I should be having sex. I let myself go along with basically peer pressure. And it sucked. But, it wasn't my exes fault, they would have taken a no, or even a non-answer reluctance, I gave the yes.

[Sentio]

I think the question of consent becomes iffy when factors outside of the relationship itself, such as societal standards, and the person's self-perception, come into play.

The question of "Is someone who doesn't realise what they're doing is nonconsensual still a rapist?" is just as confounding as the question of "Is a slave who doesn't know he's enslaved still a slave?" It's why we take into account intent in criminal cases, and why there exists a distinction between murder and manslaughter.

I'd say that either which way, if you give someone the impression that you are consenting, it's not their fault if you're doing it for the wrong reasons. That's as if you really don't want to give someone your heirloom china, but you give it to them anyway. That experience is negative for you and the person should probably not have taken your heirloom china, but that doesn't make them a thief. In the same way, if you give someone your consent without really wanting to, you're going to have a bad (in some cases even traumatic) experience, and it would be better if the person somehow realised that your consent isn't ideal and thus decided not to act on it, but if they don't, that doesn't make them a rapist, nor abusive.

It's only when the person knowingly contributes to the pressure that's leading you into giving consent that they have any culpability. So, if you're giving consent because you think it's your duty because that's what society tells you, then that's not their fault. However, if they tell you "You better consent to sex, it's your duty!" then that's coercion and thus abusive.

[Guest]

Nah. It isn't sexual abuse even if I say "fuck me or get the fuck out".

If you have a choice, and you make a choice, that choice is 100% on you. Sometimes life gives you shitty options, but it's not rape just because you gave in to pressure.

Incidentally, unless you're a sociopath, you feel a pretty strong desire to please your partner, but that doesn't mean every single thing we do in relationships is abusive just because it's done out of the pressure to please.

[Nogitsune]

The denying people sex=abuse thing seems to be a really common idea. Super creepy and yeah 100% wrong unless as has been said there is other stuff going on (like manipulating the other person and treating them like shit).

But yeah it's also not abuse to give an ultimatum... though this ALSO depends. Like, if you deiberately pick a time where the other person is in an emotional state where they are vulnerable (or if you could easily pick a better time the next day or so and just don't care) and/or you force them to make the decision right then and there on the spot, that's very different from simply telling them what you want/need in a relationship and has a huge potential to be way out of the realm of acceptable behaviour.

The question of "Is someone who doesn't realise what they're doing is nonconsensual still a rapist?" is just as confounding as the question of "Is a slave who doesn't know he's enslaved still a slave?" It's why we take into account intent in criminal cases, and why there exists a distinction between murder and manslaughter.

Nope, don't see the "confounding" aspect of this. If you rape someone you are a rapist. Rape = non-consensual sex. In a hypothetical scenario where the person has no reason at all to assume that the other person is not genuinely consenting and has obtained a clear, on their part uncoerced "yes", yeah, okay, I see the issue, but as a general statement what you're saying there is really screwed up. If a guy genuinely believed a woman who says "no" really means "yes" and went ahead, he'd still be a rapist, I don't give a crap whether he knows it.

ETA: Regarding the question above, as has been said, simply not saying no is not consent. Consent doesn't need to be verbal, but yeah it needs to be clear. Like, if both partners are clearly participating, that can serve as a "yes". But... I'm very suspicious of a scenario where one person shows they're not interested and the other person just doesn't seem to care. And if something didn't feel like consent, that's for me a sign that something went very wrong at least.

[AGEmily93]

Nah. It isn't sexual abuse even if I say "fuck me or get the fuck out".

If you have a choice, and you make a choice, that choice is 100% on you. Sometimes life gives you shitty options, but it's not rape just because you gave in to pressure.

Incidentally, unless you're a sociopath, you feel a pretty strong desire to please your partner, but that doesn't mean every single thing we do in relationships is abusive just because it's done out of the pressure to please.

You always have a choice. Even if you are robbed at gunpoint, you could have refused and been shot. That's a choice. But people would still consider that to be robbery. So where do you draw the line? Is it a choice if it gives you PTSD but you could have theoretically pushed him off you? This reminds me too much of the judge who said it wasn't rape because she didn't yell loud enough.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

[Sally]

.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

It's not really realistic to say that could "scar someone for life", etc. How you react to something like that is entirely individual. Not everyone is going to take that as though they're now a lifelong victim. They could indeed take it as being very indicative about who their partner/boyfriend/whatever is really like, not who they are.

[AGEmily93]

.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

It's not really realistic to say that could "scar someone for life", etc. How you react to something like that is entirely individual. Not everyone is going to take that as though they're now a lifelong victim. They could indeed take it as being very indicative about who their partner/boyfriend/whatever is really like, not who they are.

I was just talking to a sexual friend who is in a relationship. When she says no, he backs off, and when she says no, he backs off. She thought that was basic human decency. I'm a significant other, not a fucking robot who's on demand to have sex whenever.

[Sally]

AGEmily93, on 25 Jan 2014 - 5:15 PM, said:

Sally, on 25 Jan 2014 - 5:04 PM, said:

AGEmily93, on 25 Jan 2014 - 4:29 PM, said:

.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

It's not really realistic to say that could "scar someone for life", etc. How you react to something like that is entirely individual. Not everyone is going to take that as though they're now a lifelong victim. They could indeed take it as being very indicative about who their partner/boyfriend/whatever is really like, not who they are.

I was just talking to a sexual friend who is in a relationship. When she says no, he backs off, and when she says no, he backs off. She thought that was basic human decency. I'm a significant other, not a fucking robot who's on demand to have sex whenever.

I'm not sure how your reply refers to what I said.

[AGEmily93]

AGEmily93, on 25 Jan 2014 - 5:15 PM, said:

Sally, on 25 Jan 2014 - 5:04 PM, said:

AGEmily93, on 25 Jan 2014 - 4:29 PM, said:

.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

It's not really realistic to say that could "scar someone for life", etc. How you react to something like that is entirely individual. Not everyone is going to take that as though they're now a lifelong victim. They could indeed take it as being very indicative about who their partner/boyfriend/whatever is really like, not who they are.

I was just talking to a sexual friend who is in a relationship. When she says no, he backs off, and when she says no, he backs off. She thought that was basic human decency. I'm a significant other, not a fucking robot who's on demand to have sex whenever.

I'm not sure how your reply refers to what I said.

You seemed to be saying that if someone IS hurt by experiences of being blackmailed into sex, they are being overly sensitive and should toughen up.

[Guest]

.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

It's not really realistic to say that could "scar someone for life", etc. How you react to something like that is entirely individual. Not everyone is going to take that as though they're now a lifelong victim. They could indeed take it as being very indicative about who their partner/boyfriend/whatever is really like, not who they are.

I was just talking to a sexual friend who is in a relationship. When she says no, he backs off, and when she says no, he backs off. She thought that was basic human decency. I'm a significant other, not a fucking robot who's on demand to have sex whenever.

My point exactly. You have a choice and you make it and that's it. See how easy that is for your "sexual friend"?

Someone demanding sex and making you say no is only traumatic if you let it be. People get propositioned all the time and manage it. Some of ya'll make asexuals sound like the biggest babies, where just saying "no" is harmful.

Also, someone saying "fuck me or get the fuck out" is NOT blackmail. That's just an asshole being an asshole. You do know what blackmail is, right?

[Guest]

I was just talking to a sexual friend who is in a relationship. When she says no, he backs off, and when she says no, he backs off. She thought that was basic human decency. I'm a significant other, not a fucking robot who's on demand to have sex whenever.

A sad thing I've learned about humans is that basic decency is anything but baseline, and common sense is a rather uncommon trait.

It may not be sexual abuse to say "fuck me or get the fuck out," but that's still a terrible thing to say that could scar someone for life and make them feel they are unworthy of any love or attention just because they are asexual.

Nah. While that's not the best way to word it (not by a far cry), and I'd advocate a good deal more tact and diplomacy, it remains absolutely everybody's right in a partnership to make clear, hard limit statements about dealbreakers.

If dealing with being put to that choice - give me what I need from this ship, or the 'ship is over - is scarring for life, then the scarred person has no place being in a relationship to start with. Until they manage to get over being scarred so easily, they owe it to themselves to remain 100% strictly celibate and single. Relationships are too big a sandbox for them to play in.

You seemed to be saying that if someone IS hurt by experiences of being blackmailed into sex, they are being overly sensitive and should toughen up.

Someone who sees being faced with a hard limit dealbreaker choice as blackmail is being overly sensitive and should toughen up, IMO. The quote by Skulls is, in and of itself, nowhere near a case of anyone getting "blackmailed into sex". It's just someone standing up for themselves and their needs (plus, bad wording :p).

[Lucinda]

I interpreted what Sally said as saying that the statement says more about the person making the statement than it does about you ... unless you choose to let it reflect upon you.

I'm sorry you have been hurt by the experience ... but what have you learned from it?

Lucinda

[Guest]

Nah. It isn't sexual abuse even if I say "fuck me or get the fuck out".

If you have a choice, and you make a choice, that choice is 100% on you. Sometimes life gives you shitty options, but it's not rape just because you gave in to pressure.

Incidentally, unless you're a sociopath, you feel a pretty strong desire to please your partner, but that doesn't mean every single thing we do in relationships is abusive just because it's done out of the pressure to please.

You always have a choice. Even if you are robbed at gunpoint, you could have refused and been shot. That's a choice. But people would still consider that to be robbery. So where do you draw the line? Is it a choice if it gives you PTSD but you could have theoretically pushed him off you? This reminds me too much of the judge who said it wasn't rape because she didn't yell loud enough.

There is ZERO similarity between giving someone a relationship ultimatum and a judge refusing to prosecute rape. Literally no overlap there, so let's slow our roll, ok playa?

Now then, let me down-n-dirty this for you. This is by no means an ideal or perfect rule of thumb, but it should do well enough for our purposes.

Is it blackmail or is it a choice: Ask yourself if the threatened action deprives you of a right. If it does, it is blackmail. If it doesn't, it's just an ultimatum.

Examples: You have no right to your boyfriend's presence, affection, or relationship. If he threatens to leave, to break up with you, etc, that's fine. He has a right to place conditions on his affections. It may make him a horrible boyfriend to say "fuck me or get out", but it does not make him a rapist. Other things you have no right to... rides from him, money from him, etc. Pretty much any threat by your boyfriend to withhold something is jerky, but not rape.

On the other hand, if someone threatens to physically hurt you or your family, to steal your money, to trash your car, to spread rumors about you... that's all blackmail. That is a threat to deprive you of something you have a right to (bodily integrity, your property, your reputation).

[Sally]

AGEmily93, on 25 Jan 2014 - 5:35 PM, said:

You seemed to be saying that if someone IS hurt by experiences of being blackmailed into sex, they are being overly sensitive and should toughen up.

No, I said that I had no idea what you were saying because it didn't make sense/hang together to me. When I don't know what someone is saying, I tell them so.

But back to the issue: Certainly no one is a robot. However, the way to negotiate sex -- or non-sex -- with someone is to negotiate. Not verbally pop off when they want to have sex with you and claim they are being unreasonable or harassing or even abusing you, or that you are being caused to have PTSD. If there's no compromise possible, and/or they are being an asshole, then split. That would save both of you a lot of trouble.

[Guest]

If there's no compromise possible, and/or they are being an asshole, then split. That would save both of you a lot of trouble.

Relationships 101, in my not so humble opinion. :)

[Sentio]

The thing is, Skullery, that telling someone that something is their "duty" is still coercion because you are making them feel like they owe you a certain course of action even though they don't - and that's psychological manipulation. If you clearly phrase it as in "If you won't have sex with me, I'll leave you" - then yeah, I agree with you, that's not coervice/abusive. But if you actually try to emotionally manipulate the person into feeling like they have to have sex with you (to the point where they would feel bad internally if they don't), that's on the abusive side. The mentality of telling someone "You're my significant other, so you owe me sex" is no different from the mentality of going "I paid for dinner, so you must consent to sex now".

[Guest]

The thing is, Skullery, that telling someone that something is their "duty" is still coercion because you are making them feel like they owe you a certain course of action even though they don't - and that's psychological manipulation. If you clearly phrase it as in "If you won't have sex with me, I'll leave you" - then yeah, I agree with you, that's not coervice/abusive. But if you actually try to emotionally manipulate the person into feeling like they have to have sex with you (to the point where they would feel bad internally if they don't), that's on the abusive side. The mentality of telling someone "You're my significant other, so you owe me sex" is no different from the mentality of going "I paid for dinner, so you must consent to sex now".

The thing is, Sentio, nope. If you're not smart enough to know that you don't owe a guy sex in exchange for dinner, then you have serious issues and should not be dating. It is absolutely NOT RAPE.

[Lady Girl]

I agree with Skullery on that point. The things people say in relationships are extremely varied and appealing to your partner's emotions to get something you want is pretty common I would guess. I don't think I would call that abuse and if the partner feels it is, they could certainly say so and do just as much of 'an emotional number' on the one who asked for something in the first place.

Which leaves us with, "You're being abusive when you say I'm abusive." I think we need to be pretty careful about determining what is abuse and what might seem abusive...one person might feel abused over something that another might not.

[WhenSummersGone]

At this point in my life I honestly don't care what tricks a guy tries to pull to get me into bed, I'm not going to sleep with him if I'm not ok with it. I think it can be manipulation or abuse in dating/relationships if you let it affect you (excluding assault, rape and anything against your will). Anyone is free to leave if they aren't happy which I would do if someone is disrespectful towards me. If a guy can't wait for me to be ready to have sex then he's free to use the door and find someone else. I'd rather be with someone who is like me anyways.

[Guest]

Ok, I think we're getting a bit confused about terms in this thread:

Rape - Sex without consent from the victim.

Coercion - Forcing someone into an action via threats or some form of force.

Telling someone they owe you sex for dinner is not either. It's being an entitled jerk. If you back up that statement with a threat, it is coercion. "Have sex with me or I am failing you from my class" or "Have sex with me or I am going to evict you" etc.

Now, sometimes some people can be verbally abusive and make someone feel bad enough to give in to things. I know someone that used to tell his girlfriend basically that no one else would want her, so she should be happy with him. And, she had self-esteem issues, so she believed it. No form of abuse is good and if someone says junk like that to you, kick them to the curb and don't believe a word they say (she has since done that by the way and is now happily married to a nice guy with kids and a good job and all that white picket fence stuff she always wanted).

And many people feel ENTITLED to sex for stupid stuff. Not abusive in and of itself, but can lead to abusive behaviors. Entitlement is a huge red flag.

[Sentio]

The thing is, Skullery, that telling someone that something is their "duty" is still coercion because you are making them feel like they owe you a certain course of action even though they don't - and that's psychological manipulation. If you clearly phrase it as in "If you won't have sex with me, I'll leave you" - then yeah, I agree with you, that's not coervice/abusive. But if you actually try to emotionally manipulate the person into feeling like they have to have sex with you (to the point where they would feel bad internally if they don't), that's on the abusive side. The mentality of telling someone "You're my significant other, so you owe me sex" is no different from the mentality of going "I paid for dinner, so you must consent to sex now".

If you're not smart enough to know that you don't owe a guy sex in exchange for dinner, then you have serious issues and should not be dating.

Great. But just because something shouldn't be happening (people with issues dating), that doesn't mean they don't. The reverse of Hume's guillotine, really. Making that argument is like the conservative argument that abortion should be illegal because "if you don't want to get pregnant, you shouldn't be having sex". Well, the fact that that is their attitude is great for them, but that doesn't change the fact that people do.

Another analogy would be totalitarian ideologies. Take apartheid era South Africa - where black people were considered subhuman. If someone grows up and lives in apartheid South Africa, believing that black people are indeed subhuman, if they then open a shop and refuse to serve black people, that's less their fault than the fault of the people who educated them and taught them what they believe - since they have no reason to believe otherwise. Now, if this person, let's call them person X, began doubting what they believed, and were considering being nicer to black people, and then person Y comes along and convinces them not to do so - then person Y is more to be blamed for the ensuing racism than person X.

The same thing can be applied to our current society, as it is essentially sexual-normative and asexuals who are unaware that there is such a thing as asexuality will thus feel socially pressured into sex. It's just like many gay men and women were historically pressured into sex with opposite-sex partners because they didn't understand that their repulsion by the other sex was natural.

[AGEmily93]

I came to AVEN to find a place where people wouldn't tell me that I have to give it up or be alone forever. And here everyone says give it up or you're not responsible enough to be in a relationship, although people who demand sex from their partners are totally mature and never have to compromise.

I'm done with this.

[elainetta]

Has anyone said that in this thread without being shot down in the next post? O.o

I came to AVEN to find a place where people wouldn't tell me that I have to give it up or be alone forever. And here everyone says give it up or you're not responsible enough to be in a relationship, although people who demand sex from their partners are totally mature and never have to compromise.

I'm done with this.

The part I bolded seems to be only half-true. Completely immature, and it's frowned upon unless it's NOT a demand, but a simple statement. They don't have to compromise... in that if they really need it they should leave, because the partners aren't compatible in that case.

Admittedly the line between statements and demands, in this context, seems fuzzy to me, since I mistook statements for demands in the one relationship I was in. Since I did make those mistakes, I didn't feel qualified to post in these later stretches. To me, ending the relationship was something I considered unacceptable, so the statement became an ultimatum and I was too nervous and uncertain to bring it up. I shoulda said something in the thread after all, I guess.

I'm sorry you have gotten the idea from this thread that all asexuals must give in. :( I have seen most people here say the exact opposite of that; that true compromise must be achieved. If you don't ever want to have sex, bottom line is you never have to, and if you ever feel forced, there is someone out there who won't make you feel forced.

If anyone disagrees with that last paragraph I wrote, feel free to not reply. <_<

EDIT (again): the opinion of the OP was not that All asexuals MUST compromise, but that some don't mind it, and why should those have their experiences conflated to sexual assault? The OP is also known to acknowledge that some, possibly a good half or most asexuals, would feel very uncomfortable if a sexual element were added to their relationship - and for them of course it would be BAD, because they would Never consent. Anyone who disagrees with this can go ahead and reply so I can tear you a new one. I'm sorry, but it appears someone has been pushed into a dark place because of a thread I've been lurking in, and I HIGHLY disapprove of making people feel like shit.

[Lady Girl]

I came to AVEN to find a place where people wouldn't tell me that I have to give it up or be alone forever. And here everyone says give it up or you're not responsible enough to be in a relationship, although people who demand sex from their partners are totally mature and never have to compromise.

I'm done with this.

That's not the point of this thread at all. In fact, in my relationship I am the one who has "given it up"...we don't have a sexual compromise at this time. My husband is totally responsible enough to be in a relationship. The point of this thread is that when he was compromising, he was willing, I was not abusing him.

[Guest]

I came to AVEN to find a place where people wouldn't tell me that I have to give it up or be alone forever. And here everyone says give it up or you're not responsible enough to be in a relationship, although people who demand sex from their partners are totally mature and never have to compromise.

I'm done with this.

No one said that. You don't have to give anything up, you don't have to have sex. But, if someone DOES consent to sex, that is their choice. And saying ASKING for sex is abusive, is not cool. It's OK to state a need - whichever need that is. It's ok to state the need of NO sex. It's OK to state the need of sex. Neither side should be obligated to give in if those needs conflict. But, it's NOT abuse to say no to sex and it's NOT abuse to ask for sex.

What people were saying about maturity is that if someone just saying something like "Lets have sex now" is enough to make a person cave and harm themselves by consenting instead of being reluctant without consent or saying no, they should examine if they are ready for a relationship. Because at some point, even if two people agree on the sex part (no sex or having sex), they'll disagree about something along the way. And one should never cave and hurt themselves by doing anything they don't want to do. They should be able to stand up for themselves enough to say "No" or at least not say "Yes" when they don't want to do something, or it's not healthy.

Demanding sex is a jerk move, which everyone agreed to that I saw. What they said is it is NOT rape if someone says "You owe me sex" and you say "OK" and do it. And it's not. It doesn't mean it didn't hurt the person who gave in, it doesn't mean the person who said you owe me is not a total jerk. They just aren't a rapist. They didn't force anyone, they didn't threaten anyone, they just jerkily demanded it. Much like if I say "I am poor, you look like you have more money than I do, I think you should give me some of your money" to a random person the street, with no threats and no weapon and if they say no I walk away, it's not robbery.

And no one HAS to compromise. Not asexuals, not sexual. Compromise has to be WILLING. On both sides. Or it's not healthy.

The point of this thread is that if some asexuals, such as myself, are NOT harmed by compromise and AGREE to it WITHOUT coercion then IT'S NOT ABUSE.

And yes, I have given in before because I felt I had to, or was scared the person would leave if I said no. Those were on me though, because if I had said no, my partners would have not forced the issue. It hurt, but I did that damage to myself.

Edit: Oh and btw as LG said, her and the sexuals in this thread compromise A LOT. And the ones I have seen post are very much defenders of a persons right to say NO.

[AGEmily93]

I came to AVEN to find a place where people wouldn't tell me that I have to give it up or be alone forever. And here everyone says give it up or you're not responsible enough to be in a relationship, although people who demand sex from their partners are totally mature and never have to compromise.

I'm done with this.

No one said that. You don't have to give anything up, you don't have to have sex. But, if someone DOES consent to sex, that is their choice. And saying ASKING for sex is abusive, is not cool. It's OK to state a need - whichever need that is. It's ok to state the need of NO sex. It's OK to state the need of sex. Neither side should be obligated to give in if those needs conflict. But, it's NOT abuse to say no to sex and it's NOT abuse to ask for sex.

What people were saying about maturity is that if someone just saying something like "Lets have sex now" is enough to make a person cave and harm themselves by consenting instead of being reluctant without consent or saying no, they should examine if they are ready for a relationship. Because at some point, even if two people agree on the sex part (no sex or having sex), they'll disagree about something along the way. And one should never cave and hurt themselves by doing anything they don't want to do. They should be able to stand up for themselves enough to say "No" or at least not say "Yes" when they don't want to do something, or it's not healthy.

Demanding sex is a jerk move, which everyone agreed to that I saw. What they said is it is NOT rape if someone says "You owe me sex" and you say "OK" and do it. And it's not. It doesn't mean it didn't hurt the person who gave in, it doesn't mean the person who said you owe me is not a total jerk. They just aren't a rapist. They didn't force anyone, they didn't threaten anyone, they just jerkily demanded it. Much like if I say "I am poor, you look like you have more money than I do, I think you should give me some of your money" to a random person the street, with no threats and no weapon and if they say no I walk away, it's not robbery.

And no one HAS to compromise. Not asexuals, not sexual. Compromise has to be WILLING. On both sides. Or it's not healthy.

The point of this thread is that if some asexuals, such as myself, are NOT harmed by compromise and AGREE to it WITHOUT coercion then IT'S NOT ABUSE.

And yes, I have given in before because I felt I had to, or was scared the person would leave if I said no. Those were on me though, because if I had said no, my partners would have not forced the issue. It hurt, but I did that damage to myself.

Edit: Oh and btw as LG said, her and the sexuals in this thread compromise A LOT. And the ones I have seen post are very much defenders of a persons right to say NO.

I agree with the title of this thread that willing compromise is not abuse. However, some posts devolved into defending emotionally abusive behavior. Lying and manipulating someone into having sex with you is wrong. Messing with someone's head to make you have sex with them is wrong. It is NOT wrong for two people who care about each other to agree to have sex for one partner's benefit. It is wrong for someone to be demanded to have sex at the drop of a hat without asking if they're ok with it.

I just don't see it could count as real consent if it's done out of fear. I think in a real compromise, it would be done out of mutual respect and understanding.