Haven for the Human Amoeba

Just so people know, I'm in the process of acquiring asexuality.org for AVEN. Is the person who runs asexuality.net on this forum? When is your site going up?

I'm with you completely, xzp, on the sex ritual being bullshit. And I follow drksprkl on my friends having sex: it seems to make them happy, so more power to it. It only bugs me if I think the sex is unhealthy or if I think it's going to have a big impact on our relationship. I hear you too on it not being as big a thing if it's my LGB friends. This could be internalized homophobia (same-gender sex isn't "real" sex) or it could be because the entire sex ritual is structured differently in the queer community. They're already outside of the cultural dating norm, so they tend to be more laid back about sexuality (on the whole) which seems like a much healthier way to go about things. I don't think that there's anything inherint about sexual people that makes them act this way, (where's platonicpimp when we need him?) maybe its a little bit biological but I think its largely culturally learned. And I agree that it's not doing them any more good than it's doing us. THIS, I think, is the other, key side to asexual visibility. It's important to us that asexuality is widely understood, it's important to all of the people who are struggling with a lack of sexuality but don't know what to call it, and it's important to the sexual world (and also very difficult for them to accept) because it questions their fundamental assumptions about relationships. Me and my organizing/action focus. (On that note, E-mail me at djay@... if you want to get added to the asexual organizing listserve. We only have 2 people right now, but once we have a few more I think we'll be able to start doing work. I want to make a printable flier or something official-looking explaining asexuality, and then see where we can go from there...)

There have been men (and one woman) who have turned my best female friends into something ugly and horrible.<<

I really object to this notion. Bad relationships can bring out the worst in people, but they hardly ever create something that isn't already there.

>>I think it only works if both people give something up, too often it seems that one person does all the giving, and the other the taking.<<

And you'd be shocked at how many people are A-OK with this sort of arrangement. People end up in such lop-sided relationships because it suits their characters perfectly. I never feel sorry for adults that end up in bad relationships, because I know that they themselves are 99% of the reason that they're in such relationships to begin with.

--Judy (back from the dead apparently)

I have a close male friend who calls me a lot and we go out together, but the minute he lines up a girlfriend, he dumps me and I never hear a word from him until he gets fed up with the girlfriend.<<

Umm...this is not a close male friend. This is an incredibly manipulative human specimen. Why don't you tell him that you're not his therapist?

>>To me this is one of the many problems with sex--and I'm not talking just about intercourse here. The whole mating routine seems to detract from our specialness as human beings--the things that distinguish us from animals. The sex ritual causes us to act in ways that we would not normally act, and, IMHO, causes a large percentage of the misery on the face of the earth.<<

Sorry, but I really can't blame sex for being the cause of man's inhumanity to man, so to speak. If sex is important to you, and you act in ways that you see fit in order to procure it, then you are not acting outside of your normal character, but rather, well in line with it. Sex is simply important to some people, even essential. I can't fault them for that. I can't say that they are somehow less developed as humans for having such needs. Intimacy is a very important human need, and in the minds of many sex is simply another form of intimacy.

--Judy

I think it's impossible to have serious, regular interactions with someone and not be affected by them. I assume that you would agree with this. Children learn behaviors from their parents, we pick up some good or bad habits from friends, our tastes in music or books change or expand(if only slightly) depending on what our friends, neighbors coworkers, etc, have exposed to us.

From this point of view, I don't see what's so objectionable about saying that people can turn completely vile after spending so much time with a vile significant other.

We all have ugly sides. I'm not saying that my friends were headed for sainthood and then all of a sudden turned into satan-worshipping-backstabbing prostitutes as soon as they got asked out on a date. But...anger and general frustrations from bad relationships tend to go out into unwarranted territory. Aren't we always adding new things to our personalities? We aren't born with every behavior ingrained, at least that's never been proven.

<<And you'd be shocked at how many people are A-OK with this sort of arrangement. People end up in such lop-sided relationships because it suits their characters perfectly. >>

Yeah, that's true. I wonder how many of those people would be happy if relationships weren't expected of them. I mean, if they felt no societal pressure to have a boyfriend/girlfriend, would they deal with a person who treats them badly? (And yes, I do believe that taking and not giving is "treating someone badly", even if it's their fault, and even if the other person likes it)

Adult personalities are much less pliable than those of children. To that effect, adults tend to seek out their own misery. We don't so much pick up bad habits from friends as it is the case that we seek out bad friends from habit. Finding oneself in a shitty relationship, especially multiple ones, is the surest indication of having a serious character flaw.

--Judy

I wonder how many of those people would be happy if relationships weren't expected of them. I mean, if they felt no societal pressure to have a boyfriend/girlfriend, would they deal with a person who treats them badly?<<

No, no! I hate this "societal pressure" excuse. Practically noone in modern society would claim that having a crappy relationship just for the sake of having one is a good thing. This is the sort of excuse that people in bad relationships use to justify their own stupidity.

--Judy

I was talking more along the lines of biting your nails or saying certain phrases your friend might say.I agree that yes, most of us tend to find the same type of friend over and over again, but no matter who we're hanging out with, we're going to take some of them with us wherever we go.

Gee, that's actually quite funny. Most people (outside of thise forum) would claim that a crappy relationship is better than no relationship. They don't say that in so many words, but how many times have you heard "Oh, he stole all my money but I loooooooove him" or "No one else would take me to the prom" or "My life is terrible, I don't even have a girlfriend" or other such nonsense? These people aren't looking for quality, they're looking for a body. Just about anybody.

Judysins said,

"Sorry, but I really can't blame sex for being the cause of man's inhumanity to man, so to speak. If sex is important to you, and you act in ways that you see fit in order to procure it, then you are not acting outside of your normal character, but rather, well in line with it. Sex is simply important to some people, even essential. I can't fault them for that. I can't say that they are somehow less developed as humans for having such needs. Intimacy is a very important human need, and in the minds of many sex is simply another form of intimacy."

Sex is not the cause...man is the cause. But sex plays a big role in man's inhumanity to others, unwittingly or not. I'm not saying this is true of every sexual relationship, but many, many of them are fraught with the problems that sex inevitably brings: jealousy, possessiveness, fear, domination, etc. IMHO, if sex is important to you and you find it essential to satisfy your need for intimacy (one of the most misunderstood words in the human vocabulary), then you will naturally play out this scenario until you see it for what it really is...neither essential nor "intimate."

I'd be willing to bet that most of the awful relationships judysins talks about are ones involving sex.

Gee, that's actually quite funny. Most people (outside of thise forum) would claim that a crappy relationship is better than no relationship. They don't say that in so many words, but how many times have you heard "Oh, he stole all my money but I loooooooove him" or "No one else would take me to the prom" or "My life is terrible, I don't even have a girlfriend" or other such nonsense? These people aren't looking for quality, they're looking for a body. Just about anybody.<<

My point was that no one in her right mind would say that such persons weren't stupid and needy. These are dependent personalities, and no rational person in this society looks favorably on such persons. I don't deny that these persons exist, but I certainly don't believe that they represent some sort of societal standard.

--Judy

Sex is not the cause...man is the cause. But sex plays a big role in man's inhumanity to others, unwittingly or not. I'm not saying this is true of every sexual relationship, but many, many of them are fraught with the problems that sex inevitably brings: jealousy, possessiveness, fear, domination, etc. IMHO, if sex is important to you and you find it essential to satisfy your need for intimacy (one of the most misunderstood words in the human vocabulary), then you will naturally play out this scenario until you see it for what it really is...neither essential nor "intimate." <<

Practically all relationships have the potential to be consumed by "jealousy, possessiveness, fear, and domination"...ever see the petty crap that goes on in families, or even in a research lab. Sex is just sex...I don't believe in injecting any more meaning into the activity than is actually there. Some people find it to be pleasurable and who am I to say otherwise. Why is sex a less important endeavor than say writing a novel, or learning how to play an instrument... This is all very subjective. I can only speak for myself and certainly wouldn't dare to pass judgement on what others consider important.

>>I'd be willing to bet that most of the awful relationships judysins talks about are ones involving sex.<<

Most awful relationships consist of bad familial interactions...and well...most people aren't in the business of screwing their relatives.

--Judy

THis is not an addition to your ongoing thread but rather a question: has anyone here checked out that asexualpals.com matchmaking site? Just wondering what people have to say about it. I actually signed up for a one-month trial but it turns out that there has been a small number of members total since its dawn in August. I think that part of that problem is the lack of awareness that there are others like us. Part of the problem is that it's a pay service (I know, I'm a sukker, but I had to find out...). If it weren't a pay service I'd ask more of us to join it to help support the 'industry' of us all.

I think I posted this earlier, but I'll do it again as there seem to be some new names on this list since last time I posted it...

To me,

'HeteroRomantic' = interest in romance *but not sex* with the opposite gender (this was my own neologism created in search of defining myself)

which follows that one could be 'Homo- or Bi-romantic' as well. This descriptor implies that the person is an asexual who is interested in romance.

'Asexual' = (biologically) lack of physical sex organs; (psychologically) lack of interest in sex

'Celibate' and 'abstinent' imply temptation resistance, therefore not synonymous with asexual.

Maybe we can describe ourselves as 'Sex-free'?

'Androgynous' = lack of psychological gender, sometimes with an outwardly gender-ambiguous appearance

Q: Are there asexuals out there (presumably without romantic attraction toward anyone) who also have androgynous identities with gender-ambiguous appearance?

Samantha

Anyone ever read that book? It's fascinating. I work in the mental health field and read whatever mental health stuff I can find about asexuality. He's actually a recovering sex addict who talks about how in recovery the sex addicts tend to completely abstain.. so it mostly addresses secondary asexuals for whom abstinence becomes a protective mechanism from emotional hurt, but for me (always asexual from birth) it helped shed light into the idea of sexual romantics. I always thought of myself as 'addicted to love', and wondered if my asexuality is a protectant against sexual contact from someone with whom I was fatally romantically attracted to. The problem with this theory though is that in the two instances when I did trust and love men in romantic relationships, to the point of considering marriage, I still did not have a sex drive for them! Hm. Anyway Carnes is really intelligent and insightful and has been one of the brave souls to make sexual addiction and sexual 'anorexia' (as he puts it) visible.. and I think his stuff makes ya think.. it's cool.

Crish (and/or anyone else who feels like ansering) a few questions...

I'm curious how you define romantic. What does it mean to be "romantically attracted" to someone? And I'm curious, also, how you define romantic relationships outside of the realm of sexuality. Becuase historically that's been the distinction: romantic relationships had sex (and hence a guage of monogomy, and hence a reason to be "set apart" from other relationships) while nonromantic relationships didn't. Is there a sense of monogomy in a nonsexual romantic relationship? I guess for me it's always seemed like a romantic model would just get in the way of actual intimacy.

Next question: You draw a paralell between a lack of romantic attraction and androgyny. Why? What do romance and gender have to do with each other, inherintly? And to answer you're question though I'm not androgynous I've been thinking about it somewhat recently as something that would fit me rather well. A few of my asexual (or near-asexual) friends who aren't on this forum are somewhat androgynous.

-BRC

My thoughts quickly on the titular debate:

I don't think bad relationships are a product of sex, and I think they're only sort of a product of social pressure. I don't think sex is really an important enough factor (first off) to go about wrecking relationships, and I think that we're just as capable of forming bad relationships (given the opporitunity, which generally we're not) as sexual people. While I agree that most people wouldn't say that a shitty relationship is better than none at all, there is a notion that a relationship (and a very specific type of relationship) is fundamentally necessary. I think that bad relationships happen so much because it's socially acceptable (in fact I'd say its in some ways encouraged) to be romantically attracted to someone that you would never in your right mind want to be friends with. Romantic relationships are about expectations, about meeting prince charming, immediately gauging that it's prince charming, riding off into the sunset and having prince charming live up to your various preconcieved notions. So its considered acceptable for you to treat an asshole who you for whatever reason decide is prince(ss) charming accordingly. The reason that so many romantic relationships wind up shitty is that relationships built on expecations simply don't work. And when people get extremely wrapped up in their expectations they exhibit the sort of behaviour that people are talking about with their friends.

In high school I had several asexual romances:

The first one was with a guy I "fell in love with" over the phone. He had the dreamiest voice I had ever heard. He was so sweet and sensitive I just HAD to meet him. We talked for hours on the phone every night. When I met him, I was a bit surprised by his appearance. He was a stick-figure of a boy with braces, "coke-bottle" glasses and pimples! I would have run away, but I kept thinking about the conversations we had every night. Instead of running, I looked past his glasses and discovered that his eyes were a beautiful golden-brown. He was still the sweet sensitive guy with the dreamy voice that I was "in love" with so I stuck around. We had a wonderful romance. We called each other "boyfriend" and "girlfriend", we exchanged cards and gifts, and we went to the movies or just out for pizza. It was great!

The next guy I "dated" was kind of a bully. It took me a while to realize this since I thought his expressions of extreme jealousy were cute! We held hands in the hallways at school, ate lunch together all the time, exchanged romantic cards and gifts, and he made sure that the WHOLE SCHOOL knew that I was HIS GIRL. He imposed rules on me that became unbearable so we split up...at which point he (and his friends) took it upon t hemselves to scare away any other guy that tried to go out with me. (Boooo...Hisssss!!!)

The third asexual romance I experienced in high school was a little bit different. My name was always at the top of the honor roll...until HE arrived! When I saw his name where MINE should have been, I was determined to seek and destroy this invader who de-throned me. When we met, it was like two arch-rivals in a cowboy movie (insert "western DUEL" background music here)! My eyes said something that would have been subscipted as, "This honor roll ain't big enough for the two of us!"

His eyes answered with, "Ya DON'T say?!" We exchanged names while looking each other up and down...Several weeks later, we came to respect each others intelligence and became friends. Soon afterwards, we discovered that we had other things in common like a desire to perform (drama club, band, choir - I was also in dance, he wasn't), art and a love for poetry. We wrote poems and drew pictures for each other. We couldn't talk on the phone or be real open about the romantic aspect of our relationship because we didn't share the same ethnicity. Neither of our families would have taken us seriously if we tried to pursue a more public relationship. We talked a lot in school, held hands when no one was looking and let our eyes say things that our mouths could never utter.

All three of those relationships were asexual because sexual intercourse was never introduced into the "arena". (No, I didn't provide the Monica L. type sexual favors either!) We had the romance, we had the "fidelity", we just didn't have sex. Walking away from each one was emotionally easier on me than my later, sexual relationship break-ups. To this day, if I ran into any of those three guys, I'm sure that we could pick up our friendships right where we left them.

(Now that I've shared this information, I forgot WHY I wanted to share it in the first place. DAMN my memory sometimes!)

Ok, now I remember why I wanted to share those experiences with you all. I just wanted to let you know that it is possible to enjoy an asexual relationship without giving up the romance. Fidelity and jealousy can exist in relationships that do not include sex. These can be "good" or "bad" relationships, too. Really, a lot of the "drama" that usually appears in sexual relationships can exist in asexual relationships, too. In my last post, I just mentioned the asexual romantic relationships that I've been involved with. I didn't mention my strictly platonic friendships (read asexual relationships) with females which have endured or fallen apart due to emotional fidelity (a-to gossip or not to gossip; b-can your friends befriend your enemies) or jealousy (a-is he my man or yours; b-she's so pretty...I hate her). People have emotions. Emotions get in the way of developing a "good" relationship quite often. This phenomena happens in sexual relationships, asexual romantic relationships, and asexual platonic relationships. What's important (when trying to develop a "good" relationship) is emotional maturity. If both parties are emotionally mature, then they can build a "good" relationship together.

Now, don't ask me "how" mature one has to be in order to develop such a relationship because I'm still working on this myself. I've just come to the realization that this is necessary!

You might be wondering why things didn't work out with either of the other two guys I mentioned in my previous post. The first guy (with the golden eyes) was two years older than me so he went off to college, but he did come back to take me to my senior prom. Also, I was young and VERY immature so I let the bully pull my attention away from him. I already told you what happened to the bully. I met the third guy during my senior year. After graduation we both went our separate ways. I went to an out-of-state college.

Comments? Questions?

I agree that there can be romance in non-sexual relationships, because I'm in one now that is very romantic.

Maybe this is just me, but I have found that even though there are problems and "drama" sometimes in non-sexual relationships, that there seems to be more emotional turmoil in sexual ones. In my experience, sex has destroyed what would otherwise have continued to be some quite nice friendships. I have thought a lot about this, and it seems to me that the minute you starting acting on sexual feelings with someone that this changes the way you see each other. Wish I could be more specific, but something just changes, and not for the better. Has anyone else ever experienced this?

You're right. When I mentioned that it was emotionally harder on me when my sexual relationships didn't work out, that's exactly what I was talking about. I realize that this has a lot to do with "social programming", but I felt that I was giving away a part of myself when I had sex with someone. Our society has made too big a deal out of sex. I would add more, but I have to get back to work.

Society makes wayyyy too big a deal out of sex, that's for sure. It's a money-making business, that's why, and easy to sell since it is inherently addictive. I mean let's face it, it's not too hard to convince people that they need sex, that it's good for their health, blah blah blah.

All I know is I'm so much happier since I stopped "doing it." :o)

I agree entirely. Not only does sex sell, but sex is sold, extremely agressively, as this sort of cornucopia. Source of power, intimacy, pleasure, stability, excitement, expression, posession, fun, maturity, purity, commitment, individuality, love and self-worth. And it burns calories too. When you try and cram so many (often contradictory) implications onto an already implication-wrought (pregnancy, STDs) activity its no wonder problems arise.

And this seems related to the difficulty with talking about asexual relationships. If all of that stuff (above) is culturally tied up in sexuality then how do we gain access to it (at least the parts we want)? I know that's how it is for me, anyway. Like I have to extract things (certain types of long-term intimate relationships) from their sexual context in order to be able to have them.

I agree that acting on sexual impulses changes the dynamics of the relationship. I am reluctant to label a romantic relationship as "non-sexual." From my experience, a romantic relationship is charged with lots of erotic energy. The energy is positive, loving and intimate. Once the sex act occurs, the erotic charge channels into an egocentric quest for an orgasm. Simply put, there is no need to reduce the romantic, intimate and selfless experience to the act of sex, unless/except there exists a mutual desire to precreate.

For me a letdown has occurred as a consequence of doing the sex act---in every relationship I have ever had. The quest for "carnal knowledge" is a wonderful journey so long as it remains at the "carnal mystique" level.

jay