Haven for the Human Amoeba

If we went farther with this analogy, it would be interesting to ask which parts of the dish set would be assigned with which sexual organs

This weekend my sister told me that she wants to be "normal" after years of being so outside the mainstream of society (no boyfriend, no social life) and so she's pulling out into that traffic flow by having a boyfriend, having sex and moving out of the house. More power to her, I say, if it makes her happy. I'd hate to be normal, personally, if I'm happy being an oddball. I believe that she really felt self-conscious always being out in public by herself. She wants to have someone to lean on and be with her. Sex is just a part of the package that normal people have, whereas I'd rather open that package and buy only the parts I want. :) Kind of like a dish set. I'll take the plates and the ordinary silverware and leave the soup tureen, the salad forks and the saucers cuz I'd never need 'em. *LOL*

djay@w... said:

I think that there's more than simple sexual desire fueling people's need to date and marry (which are, of course, interrelated.) There are alot of things in society which are only available through marraige. Marraige provides social stability. If someone doesn't get married then it is assumed that they CAN'T (which is a huge stigma) and they have to live with the stigma.

I completely agree with the part about the social complexities surrounding the relationship getting in the way. There are so many unwritten laws/taboos out there regarding how to act, how to behave, what to wear, etc. for each gender that role-playing and game-playing are usually more important than the actual sexual relationship itself. A lot of times, the couple never gets to the actual physical part.

I completely agree. Let me clarify.

You can build intimacy with someone by doing a puzzle together, by sparring, by dancing, cooking etc. Sex has no special status that makes it prevent the intimacy that so many other activities build. That being said, if you JUST cook/ dance/etc you're not going to wind up with much of an intimate relationship. Sexuality is hugely hugely overemphasized in terms of its intimacy- granting abilities, but that does not mean that they wholly do not exist. Often times the social complexities around sex (not sex itself) make relationships hell, and wind up procluding intimacy. I really want to emphasize this point though. I think that it's just as wrong for us to tell people that they are better off being asexual as it is for sexual people to tell us that we are repressed and "missing out." No one form of sexuality is superior to another.

djay@w... said:

Interesting, but a tad antisexual for my taste. I think that sexuality is a great way to breed intimacy, just not THE way.

Well, I totally disagree with THAT!! Sexuality does not breed intimacy...not REAL intimacy. And it ALWAYS gets boring after awhile, not to mention that you never really get to know a person if you have sex with them up front, or go through a bunch of sexual rituals with them. It's all just an illusion, but people cling to it because of all the false education we've had about it, beginning with Freud and his ilk. We've been brainwashed into believing that we can't live without sex.

First off have you all come-out? I mentioned the word to a co-worker for the first time this week-end. They said "What, you mean someone having sex with themselves?" Everyone giggled and chatted about masterbation for a few minutes and then moved on to a new subject. Do you use the word much?

I understand that the ENDA bill is moving it's way through the system into law. Shouldn't the term asexual be included? Wouldn't it be easier to add it now then a decade down the road?

Sign up for FREE email from Potosi Online at http://www.potosionline.com/ Daily News, Weather, Business Links, and so much more.....

Run a small business? Then you need professional email like you@... from Everyone.net http://www.everyone.net?tag

If we went farther with this analogy, it would be interesting to ask which parts of the dish set would be assigned with which sexual organs

"I'm a little teapot, short and stout..." ;)

First off have you all come-out?

To a few key individuals, yes -- so in two words -- "not really." Like some others have expressed before on this list, there doesn't seem to be a huge need to, except in certain circumstances, for me. For the most part, I do not really talk much about myself "out there," so dropping a bombshell like that on everyone isn't really necessary.

Then, the irony is that they probably wouldn't even see it as a bombshell. Most likely, as in your case, they would think it was a prelude to a joke.

Perhaps some day I will find the need to, but for now, my co-workers are all plenty surprised enough when I mention something as personal as the fact that I have a pet.

I am delighted to have found this group. For a long time I thought that something was wrong with me...here I am an attractive and intelligent women and have no desire or enjoyment of sex. I prefer a nonsexual affectionate marriage. However I will not "hold my breath" I am looking forward to learning more about asexuality and meeting new friends and perhaps a lifetime mate...

I'm pretty out, though the situation of a college campus is different than that of a workplace. People who I don't know come up to me and ask me about asexuality, which is a little odd but good in the end. In my experience there's alot in how you bring it up. Stress that it's a sexual orientation (it helps if you're in a gay-friendly environment), an "inherint" thing, not a problem, and also something which should be treated somewhat seriously. -DJ

On 29 Apr 2001, 07:11 +00:00, Marjorie Myer said:

First off have you all come-out?

To a few key individuals, yes -- so in two words -- "not really." Like some others have expressed before on this list, there doesn't seem to be a huge need to, except in certain circumstances, for me. For the most part, I do not really talk much about myself "out there," so dropping a bombshell like that on everyone isn't really necessary.

Then, the irony is that they probably wouldn't even see it as a bombshell. Most likely, as in your case, they would think it was a prelude to a joke.

Perhaps some day I will find the need to, but for now, my co-workers are all plenty surprised enough when I mention something as personal as the fact that I have a pet.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Firstly, some news about the group of asexual women I was trying to get organised. At the moment, there are probably 6, maybe 7 women who would be interested in joining ... Next month, we will have a first (individual) meeting, to get to know each other a bit ...

About the book of Liz Hodgkinson: they had the book in the library, so I red it. I think it's too anti-sexual. Personnaly, I think it's too extreme.

About being "out": to some people, I am, and it feels good when you feel that they accept you this way. To others, I'm not. I sometimes find it comfortable that there are people who don't know about my asexuality, because when you are "out", to others, you are "representing the whole asexual community" (caused by the fact that there are only few people who come out)... I sometimes like being "anonymous" ...

happy May Day to one and all ; ]

Sign up for FREE email from Potosi Online at http://www.potosionline.com/ Daily News, Weather, Business Links, and so much more.....

Run a small business? Then you need professional email like you@... from Everyone.net http://www.everyone.net?tag

Quoting Marjorie Myer <crwndtrsrs@...>:

happy May Day to one and all ; ]

right back at ya

About the book of Liz Hodgkinson: they had the book in the library, so I red it. I think it's too anti-sexual. Personnaly, I think it's too extreme.

Oops! Guess that makes me an anti-sexual then, because from what I read on the internet I thought it was right on the money.

I'm curious what people's views are of abstinence only education. Good/bad? What about for asexual kids in highschool? (What do the asexual kids IN highschool think?) It's interesting how the larger public is struggling with issues so related to asexuality...

It's pointless and offensive...the vast generalizations that all teenagers are hedonists that must be programmed to wait until marriage if not out of morality for their health is degrading not only for me who has almost no sex drive but even for those who are sexual. No one would act so condescending to adults...but this is more of an ageist issue than asexual. --Nothing

"About being "out": to some people, I am, and it feels good when you feel that they accept you this way. To others, I'm not. I sometimes find it comfortable that there are people who don't know about my asexuality, because when you are "out", to others, you are "representing the whole asexual community" (caused by the fact that there are only few people who come out)... I sometimes like being "anonymous" ..."

I think this statement sums up my situation perfectly. To some people I tell them everything, to others nothing. I guess its just about my being comfortable around different people. However if anyone ever asks (which will probably never happen), I'll be happy to admit I'm asexual. Which brings up a good point, why does everyone always assume you have to have a certain sexual preference? I was listening to this radio show "Private Lives" and this girl called up how her 22yr husband is frustrating her because he doesn't want sex. The first thing the hosts asks is "Is he gay? That's not normal behavior for someone his age." It pissed me off. Its not normal not to want sex, but its normal to have some sick fetish about little boys or BDSM?? Who's the real freak?

Don't knock on BDSM, it's one of the best models out there for understanding intimacy, in my opinion. (power games let people be comfortable being vulnerable, which is what intimacy is all about.)

-DJ

"About being "out": to some people, I am, and it feels good when you feel that they accept you this way. To others, I'm not. I sometimes find it comfortable that there are people who don't know about my asexuality, because when you are "out", to others, you are "representing the whole asexual community" (caused by the fact that there are only few people who come out)... I sometimes like being "anonymous" ..."

I think this statement sums up my situation perfectly. To some people I tell them everything, to others nothing. I guess its just about my being comfortable around different people. However if anyone ever asks (which will probably never happen), I'll be happy to admit I'm asexual. Which brings up a good point, why does everyone always assume you have to have a certain sexual preference? I was listening to this radio show "Private Lives" and this girl called up how her 22yr husband is frustrating her because he doesn't want sex. The first thing the hosts asks is "Is he gay? That's not normal behavior for someone his age." It pissed me off. Its not normal not to want sex, but its normal to have some sick fetish about little boys or BDSM?? Who's the real freak?

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

being "out": some of my friends who are simply interested in sexuality (as it is an interesting topic) know I'm asexual; otherwise, it just doesn't come up unless someone is interested in a potentially sexual relationship with me-- in which case I tell them.

About BDSM, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that it's unhealthy at the least-- I think it's generally a reaction formation response to an inability to let go of control. To really be comfortable in a casually non-controlling, intimate relationship you have to understand why you can't let go of control-- not just beat down the urge to control with brute force. That compulsion may get beaten to a bloody pulp, but it will still be there, and will still block the way to a comfortably loving relationship in which each person can let go of control without being constantly aware that they are doing so.

Don't knock on BDSM, it's one of the best models out there for understanding intimacy, in my opinion. (power games let people be comfortable being vulnerable, which is what intimacy is all about.)

-DJ

"About being "out": to some people, I am, and it feels good when you feel that they accept you this way. To others, I'm not. I sometimes find it comfortable that there are people who don't know about my asexuality, because when you are "out", to others, you are "representing the whole asexual community" (caused by the fact that there are only few people who come out)... I sometimes like being "anonymous" ..."

I think this statement sums up my situation perfectly. To some people I tell them everything, to others nothing. I guess its just about my being comfortable around different people. However if anyone ever asks (which will probably never happen), I'll be happy to admit I'm asexual. Which brings up a good point, why does everyone always assume you have to have a certain sexual preference? I was listening to this radio show "Private Lives" and this girl called up how her 22yr husband is frustrating her because he doesn't want sex. The first thing the hosts asks is "Is he gay? That's not normal behavior for someone his age." It pissed me off. Its not normal not to want sex, but its normal to have some sick fetish about little boys or BDSM?? Who's the real freak?

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

About BDSM, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that it's unhealthy at the least-- I think it's generally a reaction formation response to an inability to let go of control. To really be comfortable in a casually non-controlling, intimate relationship you have to understand why you can't let go of control-- not just beat down the urge to control with brute force. That compulsion may get beaten to a bloody pulp, but it will still be there, and will still block the way to a comfortably loving relationship in which each person can let go of control without being constantly aware that they are doing so. The interesting thing about S&M though is while the masochist pretends to have no control, in fact as long as it is consensual, the individual has *complete* control. The sadist is simply allowed to hurt the individual to a certain extent, which I see as perfectly acceptable. It is trust on the part of the masochist that as (s)he is bound that the sadist will honor his/her requests.

Besides, it is a common male fanasty to have sex with an individual who is unconscious if not dead. For a sadist, they are free to act upon a submissive person who will actually enjoy the act. None of this strikes me as sick.

While *very* different than S&M, it isn't uncommon for one of my good friends and I to hurt ourselves in the other's presence, and this is an action *out* of intimacy...

--Nothing

I thought that that website with the content by Liz Hodgkinson was fairly anti-sexual as well although I thought she did raise some interesting and informative points. I have not "come out" so to speak, at all....noone knows and noone really need know as far as I'm concerned until I am forced into a situation where it becomes inevitable...

Firstly, some news about the group of asexual women I was trying to get organised. At the moment, there are probably 6, maybe 7 women who would be interested in joining ... Next month, we will have a first (individual) meeting, to get to know each other a bit ...

About the book of Liz Hodgkinson: they had the book in the library, so I red it. I think it's too anti-sexual. Personnaly, I think it's too extreme.

About being "out": to some people, I am, and it feels good when you feel that they accept you this way. To others, I'm not. I sometimes find it comfortable that there are people who don't know about my asexuality, because when you are "out", to others, you are "representing the whole asexual community" (caused by the fact that there are only few people who come out)... I sometimes like being "anonymous" ...

So... I'm curious, how is pain intimate? The reason I ask is first of all, that I'm not really thinking about intimacy (or anything deep really) when I'm in pain. Also, I ask out of curiosity because one of the primary reasons that I feel that sex bothers me is that it feels like it was "invented by someone else". Its been done before. Its got no imagination, no uniqueness which is important to me for intimacy. So I'm trying to understand all the ways in which sex, love-making, and intimacy can be not-so-generic. Someone personal to the couple, rather than "using someone else's moves" or whatever. Also, I'm not going to outright say that bondage/ bdsm is always unhealthy in a relationship. That's too big a generalization, I suspect. I'd rather look at the motives behind it. But whatever works, for each person, I say. Me, I'll wait until my imagination has been stimulated.

About BDSM, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that it's unhealthy at the least-- I think it's generally a reaction formation response to an inability to let go of control. To really be comfortable in a casually non-controlling, intimate relationship you have to understand why you can't let go of control-- not just beat down the urge to control with brute force. That compulsion may get beaten to a bloody pulp, but it will still be there, and will still block the way to a comfortably loving relationship in which each person can let go of control without being constantly aware that they are doing so. The interesting thing about S&M though is while the masochist pretends to have no control, in fact as long as it is consensual, the individual has *complete* control. The sadist is simply allowed to hurt the individual to a certain extent, which I see as perfectly acceptable. It is trust on the part of the masochist that as (s)he is bound that the sadist will honor his/her requests.

Besides, it is a common male fanasty to have sex with an individual who is unconscious if not dead. For a sadist, they are free to act upon a submissive person who will actually enjoy the act. None of this strikes me as sick.

While *very* different than S&M, it isn't uncommon for one of my good friends and I to hurt ourselves in the other's presence, and this is an action *out* of intimacy...

--Nothing

Sex, including BDSM, has nothing at all to do with intimacy...we've just been brainwashed into thinking it does. Real intimacy is caring and being there for someone.

So... I'm curious, how is pain intimate? The reason I ask is first of all, that I'm not really thinking about intimacy (or anything deep really) when I'm in pain. Also, I ask out of curiosity because one of the primary reasons that I feel that sex bothers me is that it feels like it was "invented by someone else". Its been done before. Its got no imagination, no uniqueness which is important to me for intimacy. So I'm trying to understand all the ways in which sex, love-making, and intimacy can be not-so-generic. Someone personal to the couple, rather than "using someone else's moves" or whatever. Also, I'm not going to outright say that bondage/ bdsm is always unhealthy in a relationship. That's too big a generalization, I suspect. I'd rather look at the motives behind it. But whatever works, for each person, I say. Me, I'll wait until my imagination has been stimulated.

still_i_fall said:

About BDSM, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that it's unhealthy at the least-- I think it's generally a reaction formation response to an inability to let go of control. To really be comfortable in a casually non-controlling, intimate relationship you have to understand why you can't let go of control-- not just beat down the urge to control with brute force. That compulsion may get beaten to a bloody pulp, but it will still be there, and will still block the way to a comfortably loving relationship in which each person can let go of control without being constantly aware that they are doing so. The interesting thing about S&M though is while the masochist pretends to have no control, in fact as long as it is consensual, the individual has *complete* control. The sadist is simply allowed to hurt the individual to a certain extent, which I see as perfectly acceptable. It is trust on the part of the masochist that as (s) he is bound that the sadist will honor his/her requests.

Besides, it is a common male fanasty to have sex with an individual who is unconscious if not dead. For a sadist, they are free to act upon a submissive person who will actually enjoy the act. None of this strikes me as sick.

While *very* different than S&M, it isn't uncommon for one of my good friends and I to hurt ourselves in the other's presence, and this is an action *out* of intimacy...

--Nothing

Agreed. I'm just saying that sex and BDSM are valid ways (though my no means the only ways) of caring for and being there with someone. They are expressions of intimacy, not intimacy itself.

Sex, including BDSM, has nothing at all to do with intimacy...we've just been brainwashed into thinking it does. Real intimacy is caring and being there for someone.

steven_n_g said:

So... I'm curious, how is pain intimate? The reason I ask is first of all, that I'm not really thinking about intimacy (or anything deep really) when I'm in pain. Also, I ask out of curiosity because one of the primary reasons that I feel that sex bothers me is that it feels like it was "invented by someone else". Its been done before. Its got no imagination, no uniqueness which is important to me for intimacy. So I'm trying to understand all the ways in which sex, love-making, and intimacy can be not-so-generic. Someone personal to the couple, rather than "using someone else's moves" or whatever. Also, I'm not going to outright say that bondage/ bdsm is always unhealthy in a relationship. That's too big a generalization, I suspect. I'd rather look at the motives behind it. But whatever works, for each person, I say. Me, I'll wait until my imagination has been stimulated.

still_i_fall said:

About BDSM, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that it's unhealthy at the least-- I think it's generally a reaction formation response to an inability to let go of control. To really be comfortable in a casually non-controlling, intimate relationship you have to understand why you can't let go of control-- not just beat down the urge to control with brute force. That compulsion may get beaten to a bloody pulp, but it will still be there, and will still block the way to a comfortably loving relationship in which each person can let go of control without being constantly aware that they are doing so. The interesting thing about S&M though is while the masochist pretends to have no control, in fact as long as it is consensual, the individual has *complete* control. The sadist is simply allowed to hurt the individual to a certain extent, which I see as perfectly acceptable. It is trust on the part of the masochist that as (s) he is bound that the sadist will honor his/her requests.

Besides, it is a common male fanasty to have sex with an individual who is unconscious if not dead. For a sadist, they are free to act upon a submissive person who will actually enjoy the act. None of this strikes me as sick.

While *very* different than S&M, it isn't uncommon for one of my good friends and I to hurt ourselves in the other's presence, and this is an action *out* of intimacy...

--Nothing

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I'm just saying that sex and BDSM are valid ways (though my no means

the only ways) of caring for and being there with someone. They are expressions of intimacy, not intimacy itself.

What? Huh? What the blazes are you talking about?

Please explain yourself.

BDSM stands for Bondage Domination Sadism and Massochism (sp?). We're talking about how it (and sex in general) fit into things like intimacy.

-DJ

I'm just saying that sex and BDSM are valid ways (though my no means

the only ways) of caring for and being there with someone. They are expressions of intimacy, not intimacy itself.

What? Huh? What the blazes are you talking about?

Please explain yourself.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

BDSM stands for Bondage Domination Sadism and Massochism (sp?). We're talking about how it (and sex in general) fit into things like intimacy.

-DJ

I know what BDSM is--I am just trying my very best to figure out what good there could possibly be in it and what on earth it has to do with intimacy?!?

We're (or I'm) just saying that power games and intimacy are closely linked. We need to be comfortable with people being in a position to hurt us (whether on accident or on purpose) and not. Hence BDSM (though you have to draw a distinction between pain, which is either nuetral or good, and hurt, which is negative. This isn't just in BDSM. If you insult your friend you could be just joking around, or you could really hurt them. You have to know them well enough to know the difference.)

-DJ

I know what BDSM is--I am just trying my very best to figure out what good there could possibly be in it and what on earth it has to do with intimacy?!?

I know what BDSM is--I am just trying my very best to figure out what good there could possibly be in it and what on earth it has to do with intimacy?!?

Most major religions focus on transcending the self into some concept, whether it be purity, happiness, peace, or some other goal. However, many of these emotions are extremely difficult to obtain and lack the intensity of harsher feelings such as pain. Asceticism has long been associated with torment (that generally the individual has chosen), the wounds serving as entrances for god. Many religious experiences are observed only through faith and trust.

The involvement of another individual creates a focus on another individual, thereby facilitating this strive for nirvana. It is further a display of trust since one must believe that the other individual involved will only hurt the masochist to an acceptable extent. Such an extreme need for trust (both because of the quasi- spiritual aspect and the desire for there to be no actual threat) implies intimacy.

--Nothing