Haven for the Human Amoeba

Hello,

<< If it isn't some sort of psychological sexual desire, than just want accounts for that extra intensity of feelings? >>

It's a longing to feel close to someone, non-sexually.

Well sure I have a longing to be close to my friends and family but I wouldn't call any of those romantic relationships by any means, shape or form.

Your reply still doesn't answer why there's an extra "zing" in romantic relationships.

If that extra zing-- that element that makes your heart go pitter-patter and makes you all gooey on the inside isn't a sexual component... than just what is it?

Nom

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Hello

<<For example can you explain why the LGB community thinks Boston marriages are sexual relationships-- even those relationships do not involve sexual intercourse?

The LGB community is not a scientific group either. It's pretty easy to peer through the looking glass and label something.

And how do you know that their positions on this issue are not based on clinical studies or scientific theory?

While I will agree with you that they do make statements for their own political benefit-- how do you know that their position on this particular issue -- doesn't have some factual basis?

Nom

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Hello,

<< Your reply still doesn't answer why there's an extra "zing" in romantic relationships. >>

I'd like to think of it as the strongest form of connection, perhaps on the highest spiritual and emotional level. Some people you meet are suited to be friends with, some people connect deeper with you. I find that if my family were not my family, they would be the sort of people I would fall in love with. I think of romantic love as a deep connection akin to the deep connection to family members, simply without the blood barrier.

Hmmm... I have always considered my friends to be family members that I have gotten to chance to choose. I don't make too many distinctions between my relationships with my family or friends.

However I would say though that my relationships to my family have a tendency to be closer than those with my friends only because there is a shared history.

And no I don't consider any of those relationships to be romantic. If your definition of a special relationship is someone who is as close to you as a family member than I wouldn't necessarily say that such a relationship is romantic at all.

Nom

Nom

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Hello

How do you know that AVEN isn't? Because they disagree with you?.

Well I sure as heck would like to find out-- though I already have my suspicions that they are not.

Nom

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Anyway while determining which disorder caused the other is still an unknown, I think the correlation is very interesting. And I think it would be interesting to know how many people on this list have been diagnosed with panic disorders at one time or another.

I wouldn't be suprised if there isn't quite a few panic sufferers on this list.

Yes indeed, it is an interesting connexion. Another one is schizoid, not to be confused in any way with schizophrenia. Symptoms of schizoid type is the inability to form emotional bonds with other humans, either of the positive or negative sort. A diminished interest in sex is also present, and in my uneducated opinion, it would have to do with the fact that most sexual relations are based around an emotional connection at some point. If you lack that, sex isn't going to be as interesting.

As for me, I have a substantial list of technical disorders, but most often it really doesn't bother me. I've grown to like who I am. Before I heard about asexual being an option, I just assumed that I was the way I was because of the disorders. The three biggest impactful ones would be schizoid (not to be confused with schizophrenia), anxiety disorders, and obsessive compulsive disorder. The first makes it rather extremely difficult to form an emotional connexion with another human, either in a negative or positive format -- and with the OCD, I speculated that my extreme germ phobia is what caused me to be literally disgusted with sex -- which I haven't entirely ruled out, as it seems that my repulsion is unusual here. Most are just simply indifferent.

To be honest, I haven't entirely ruled out the possibility that it is just an [un]lucky combination of mental disorders that have reduced my sex drive to non-functioning. The thing is, if that is the case, it is so low that I don't really care to change it, for all practical purposes I exhibit natural asexual behavior on that score. I'm perfectly happy with what I am. I would probably be a bit annoyed if I ever were to change (though who knows.) This usually isn't as much the case with people who have a lowered sex drive because of mental disorders. Usually one of their main reasons for getting treated is to correct this "horrific problem" and be a normal part of society. :)

I was referring to the reluctance of some people to allow Mike the freedom to define himself - which, so far as I can see, is what started this thread! :-)

I think it's perfectly possible to have romance separate from sex. Though perhaps the problem is that we're all working from different definitions of romance?

Anyone care to throw a definition into the forray? kdict turns up the interesting fact that there was no definition equivalent to ours for the word 'romance' before 1913, though more recently we have 'n 1: a relationship between two lovers [syn: love affair]' Still doesn't seem that a sexual component is necessary!

- Jordan

Jordan,

Who's says any of us are attacking Mike? I was referring to AVEN.

jordan_ai said:

Do any of /us/ have degrees in clinical psychology and/or human relationships? Any of the people attacking Mike? :-)

- Jordan

Nom De Plume said:

Mike,

Yes... but who is AVEN? Is this organization run by people with clincial degrees in psychology and human relationships or by a bunch of people who decided to band together and start a web site?

I suspect it's the latter not the former which in my opinion doesn't give its philosophies much weight.

Nom

---

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Jordan, How about this definition for "romance"? NOUN: all the pleasurable, warm, loving, affectionate feelings and experiences (such as dining together, pusuing enjoyable activities together such as watching movies, telling jokes, exchanging gifts, telling each other "I love you," "you're the only one for me,"), engaging in nonsexual physical contact such as cuddling, dancing, holding hands, lightly kissing on the lips, experiencing a "high as a kite feeling" that this person is your soul mate and more special to you than any other, and, most important, a sense of "being in love" with the person--all of this minus the desire to engage in the actual sex act. Members, what do you think of this definition of "romance"? --Mike Vice *************************************************************

I was referring to the reluctance of some people to allow Mike the freedom to define himself - which, so far as I can see, is what started this thread! :-)

I think it's perfectly possible to have romance separate from sex. Though perhaps the problem is that we're all working from different definitions of romance?

Anyone care to throw a definition into the forray? kdict turns up the interesting fact that there was no definition equivalent to ours for the word 'romance' before 1913, though more recently we have 'n 1: a relationship between two lovers [syn: love affair]' Still doesn't seem that a sexual component is necessary!

- Jordan

Nom De Plume said:

Jordan,

Who's says any of us are attacking Mike? I was referring to AVEN.

jordan_ai said:

Do any of /us/ have degrees in clinical psychology and/or human relationships? Any of the people attacking Mike? :-)

- Jordan

Nom De Plume said:

Mike,

Yes... but who is AVEN? Is this organization run by people with clincial degrees in psychology and human relationships or by a bunch of people who decided to band together and start a web site?

I suspect it's the latter not the former which in my opinion doesn't give its philosophies much weight.

Nom

---

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Okay, I am tired of this word getting misused, and I'm not just picking on any single person here.

engaging in nonsexual physical contact such as cuddling, dancing, holding hands, lightly kissing on the lips, experiencing a "high as a kite feeling"...

First, a little off topic:

I know this has been probably beaten to death, but precisely how is that nonsexual? Just because it doesn't involve literal intercourse doesn't mean it isn't sexual.

Perhaps I am just on one end of the spectrum here where I see the word asexual referring to somebody who has really no romantic attraction to either gender (or things, if you really wish to get technical. Somebody with a furniture fetish isn't an asexual in my book.)

I understand that there are marked degrees to everything, and that I am probably on the "cold fish" end of the scale. Hardly any of the things you listed appeal to me.

On back to romantics:

A light kiss can be deadly in some circumstances, such as a Judas scenario. It is the essence behind that is important, not the action. "You are the only one for me" assumes a monogamous society. "Being in love" is highly subjective, and often quite unrealistic and idealistic when you are younger. Saying "I love you." means something /entirely/ different with 30 years in between utterings.

"minus the desire to engage in the actual sex act." again, this is up for debate in my mind as to what that actually is. I contend it goes a lot further than just intercourse, and I think most people would agree that the line has to be drawn somewhere further out there than that. Wild naked "making out" is quite sexual, even if no "sex" is involved. So where is the line drawn?

Members, what do you think of this definition of "romance"?

So what really /is/ romance?

Well, not to be too contrary, this definition neglects a lot of things outside of the scope you've placed. Technically a romance is best described as a union of discrete properties intermingled in such a fashion so as to create an emotional feeling, usually in superset of reality (i.e. imaginative, dreamy, idealistic.) Thus you have Romanticism as a form of writing (for those who are not literature buffs, this doesn't mean steamy novels, it is rather a movement in art to free itself from the devices of literalism. Proposing that such is only an elaborate lie, and true great fiction should have no boundaries.); a romantic arrangement of colour; a person who has a habit of fanciful dreaming; and so forth.

A lot of people assume that such usage is a metaphorical device, comparing to "real" human romance, but they are incorrect. Most respectable dictionaries do not even address humans specifically in their definition until perhaps the 3rd or 4th alternative version (if that.) If anything using the word `Romance to describe the texture of a relationship between humans is more the metaphor (but more precisely an application), however I see people using it as if it is some sort of concrete thing. It isn't, it is a very abstract concept.

In specifics to humans:

Romance can extend beyond the limits you've defined, such as the fact that it is entirely plausible -- and also Highly Common -- for an individual to have a romantic feeling towards somebody that doesn't exist, or doesn't exist in practicality within their world. In this scenario, the other discrete property would be a mental construct of the initial property.

Romance can describe a spiritual union between one or more people engaging in some artistic project. They might not have any inclination to pursue a deep and meaningful friendship, or even a sexual one.

This is why I emphasize the importance of the device /behind/ the action. Using this definition you can still define many of your actions in a romantic light, as many of them are prime examples of emotional feedback from the result of some form of union.

So, in conclusion: Can romance be sexual? Absolutely, without a doubt! Can romance be completely sans sexual? Again, absolutely, even in intention! Your definition, no disrespect intended, is nearly completely erroneous. It is an example of a type of romance, not a definition of romance.

Ioa ]

Hi

I just joined this group and thought I would tell a little about myself. I am a 21 yrs old male who just got married and am asexual. I am glad I found this out because now I seem a lot more comfortable with myself. I struggled with the decision of hetro or homo sexuality for a long time not ever engaging in any relationship but finally found out that I didn't have to force anything on myself and being asexual was okay. My wife is hetrosexual but we have a beautiful marriage and are totally happy and dedicated to each other.

Take Care Muneeb

Hi Ioa

I totally agree with your sentiments on this one. I think the word romance is getting misused on this list.

As I have said before and I will say it again, I think if your feelings for someone extend beyond that which you feel for your blood relations or people who are just your friends, I think one has to consider the fact that there are elements of sexuality in there regardless of whether there is sexual intercourse is present or not.

Let's put this way... if there is something about a person or relationship that makes your heart pitter-patter, or makes you feel all tingly inside-- an emotion that you typically WOULD NOT feel for your family or your friends... then tell me what accounts for those extra intense feelings-- other than sexuality?????

I mean I don't know about anyone else on this list but don't get all tingly or gooey inside when I am around my friends or family members even though I do care about them!

I also think if we are going to come up with a definition of ourselves-- particularly as we grow larger, stronger and more vocal we need to have a definition that is much more narrowly defined. As it stands now, I think our definition of asexuality addresses behaviours that in many cases belong to the domain of other groups.

For example -- boston marriages-- are considered to be sexual relationships by the LGB community and by many psychologists -- even those these relationships do not involve sexual intercourse.

Anyway I think if we are to come up with a definition for ourselves it should be more closely aligned with the existing and accepted theories on human sexuality and behavior.

Currently the definition as defined by AVEN does not do this. It's merely an opinion of the webmaster(s) who created the AVEN web site, but not one that probably would hold up to existing scientific scrutiny or all the clinical studies that have been done over the years.

Nom

engaging in nonsexual physical contact such as cuddling, dancing, holding hands, lightly kissing on the lips, experiencing a "high as a kite feeling"...

First, a little off topic:

I know this has been probably beaten to death, but precisely how is that nonsexual? Just because it doesn't involve literal intercourse doesn't mean it isn't sexual.

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

<< How about this definition for "romance"? NOUN: all the pleasurable, warm, loving, affectionate feelings and experiences (such as dining together, pusuing enjoyable activities together such as watching movies, telling jokes, exchanging gifts, telling each other "I love you," "you're the only one for me,"), engaging in nonsexual physical contact such as cuddling, dancing, holding hands, lightly kissing on the lips, experiencing a "high as a kite feeling" that this person is your soul mate and more special to you than any other, and, most important, a sense of "being in love" with the person--all of this minus the desire to engage in the actual sex act. Members, what do you think of this definition of "romance"? >>

Even if we disagree on looks, I agree wholeheartedly. That's what I consider romance.

http://www.geocities.com/ncuwkwowngqo/index.html

Ok, so for those of you who are asexual, and yet feel you could be in a romantic, non-sexual, "monagamous" relationship: what would you do with your partner that would be special, that you wouldn't do with a close friend or family member? Something that would really identify it as a "relationship" rather than a friendship? With me, that's a really confusing question to ask. But I think its because I'm adaptable to the particular relationship ideas and fantasies of my partner, within reason of course. Another thing... do any asexuals have "fantasies" about potential relationships? (I'm not asking to reveal any, just if they are there). I tend to rely on imagination and get bored a little too easily when not stimulated creatively or intellectually, and therein lie a number of my own..

coz I don't think I spell it right. I went to http://www.incestfreak.com= to see if I could find the word there, but no luck. Pretty interesting site= , tho.

See wild X RATED Sex Dares!

Did you ever wonder what people will do on a dare? You would be surprised! CUM Check it out! THIS IS BETTER THAN JERRY SPRINGER Obscene, erotic, dirty, insestuous, gross, wicked, indecent, sleazy, impure, wild, erotic, pornographic, smutty, risque, sensual, sexy...You name it: - we have it!

All hard core and _real_ people!

http://www.xrateddares.com

Beyond the xxx fantasy of high school!!!

Indecent acts, people misbehaving, all in bad taste, obscene and disgraceful!

This is the real thing: Crazy people doingcrazy sexy, smutty, slimy things for the hell of it! Just like a car wreck... you gotta look!

All in bad taste and totally blood boiling! Its provocative and gross at the same time! You know you want to look!

PORNOGRAPHIC SEX GAMES Better than Jerry Springer and all REAL xxx Sex stunts and XRATED DAREs xxx How far will people go with their sexual conduct?

http://www.xrateddares.com

Ok, so for those of you who are asexual, and yet feel you could be in a romantic, non-sexual, "monagamous" relationship: what would you do with your partner that would be special, that you wouldn't do with a close friend or family member? Something that would really identify it as a "relationship" rather than a friendship?

I agree with this. For me, I have been thinking a lot about what would - for me - make the difference between an asexual relationship and a "common" friendship. I find it very hard to come up with something that I would want to do with the "relation-one", but not with a friend. Maybe the only thing: I would share more housy things with a partner, because there would be more time spent together. Maybe the difference would be the amount of time, spent together and for example, eating often together, one is ironing, while the other is washing up the dishes ...

When I meet a new person that I like and find interesting, I see this person as a possible friend. I wouldn't know on base of what I would decide that the other could be a potential partner. Why would I prefer one friend above the other? Maybe the only reason would be: the fact that you are more "available" for each other more than with another friend. But, I think the feeling wouldn't be different than that for an other friend.

Hello,

Jordan, How about this definition for "romance"? NOUN: all the pleasurable, warm, loving, affectionate feelings and experiences (such as dining together, pusuing enjoyable activities together such as watching movies, telling jokes, exchanging gifts, telling each other "I love you," "you're the only one for me,"), engaging in nonsexual physical contact such as cuddling, dancing, holding hands, lightly kissing on the lips, experiencing a "high as a kite feeling" that this person is your soul mate and more special to you than any other, and, most important, a sense of "being in love" with the person--all of this minus the desire to engage in the actual sex act. Members, what do you think of this definition of "romance"? --Mike Vice

Hmmm... your definition is interesting but I am not sure if really applies to asexuals.

For example...

1. Handholding and Dancing?

Nope. I can't say I would be interested since that is not something that I do with my close friends or family members.

2. Telling the other one "you're the only one for me"?

Nope. I can't say that I would be interested in doing or saying that either. This sounds like a sexually charged emotion to me and since I don't feel that sort of thing for people, why would I be interested in saying such a thing?? Also why would I want to lip kiss??

3. "High as a kite feeling"? Hmmmm.. if I am feeling an emotion that is MUCH MORE INTENSE than what I would feel for my close friends and family members-- isn't that due to sexual feelings????

From the looks of things your definition looks more like a definition for a SEXUAL person with a low libido-- not an asexual.

Nom

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Yes, those "romantic" feelings, as you said, could indeed be applied to sexual people with a low libido (or, for that matter, sexual people with a HIGH libido). But, according to AVEN, those feelings can be equally be argued to apply to "asexual people with a romance drive." I happen to agree with AVEN. --Mike Vice ********************************************** [email protected], Nom De Plume

Hello,

mikevice2002 said:

Jordan, How about this definition for "romance"? NOUN: all the pleasurable, warm, loving, affectionate feelings and experiences (such as dining together, pusuing enjoyable activities together such as watching movies, telling jokes, exchanging gifts, telling each other "I love you," "you're the only one for me,"), engaging in nonsexual physical contact such as cuddling, dancing, holding hands, lightly kissing on the lips, experiencing a "high as a kite feeling" that this person is your soul mate and more special to you than any other, and, most important, a sense of "being in love" with the person--all of this minus the desire to engage in the actual sex act. Members, what do you think of this definition of "romance"? --Mike Vice

Hmmm... your definition is interesting but I am not sure if really applies to asexuals.

For example...

1. Handholding and Dancing?

Nope. I can't say I would be interested since that is not something that I do with my close friends or family members.

2. Telling the other one "you're the only one for me"?

Nope. I can't say that I would be interested in doing or saying that either. This sounds like a sexually charged emotion to me and since I don't feel that sort of thing for people, why would I be interested in saying such a thing?? Also why would I want to lip kiss??

3. "High as a kite feeling"? Hmmmm.. if I am feeling an emotion that is MUCH MORE INTENSE than what I would feel for my close friends and family members-- isn't that due to sexual feelings????

From the looks of things your definition looks more like a definition for a SEXUAL person with a low libido-- not an asexual.

Nom

---

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Ok, so for those of you who are asexual, and yet feel you could be in a romantic, non-sexual, "monagamous" relationship: what would you do with your partner that would be special, that you wouldn't do with a close friend or family member? Something that would really identify it as a "relationship" rather than a friendship?

I'm new to this list and trying to discover whether I am "truly" asexual or just "a sexual person with a low libido" as someone said... I just thought I'd comment on the above quoted material... Part of what creates a 'longing' for a relationship, rather than just a friendship, with me, is the desire to kiss/cuddle, and engage in other intimacies of this nature without sexual intercourse. However, I have had an experience in the past w/a friend where we would kiss--as nothing more than friends-- and I wouldn't have a problem doing this again- with friend(S), it's not something sexual for me as much as just connecting and being close. However, most people I run into seem to hold the "typical" view of sex, kissing, monogamy, etc. What I'm trying to say is if it was possible to have relationships with people based on friendship but not withholding closer contact, that would be what I'm after, and in that sense, I have "relationship fantasies." (If you look at other countries, y'know, they kiss on the cheek, etc. but here in America, it's not so common... I'm not seeking tongue or even lip-on-lip, necessarily.) Just my 2 cents...

Ciao! ZuZu

Another way I thoguth of putting it would be: for those asexuals for whom marriage (non sexual) isn't out of the question, what leads to marriage rather than just friendship? I believe, at least for myself, that the feelings of being in love (non sexual again) or having a crush, are very different from even a best friend. I am hoping at least, that should I ever be in love with an asexual woman and vice versa, that such feelings would in a way "explain their own actions", or rather, it'd be clear then what made it different from a friend.

Ok, so for those of you who are asexual, and yet feel you could be in a romantic, non-sexual, "monagamous" relationship: what would you do with your partner that would be special, that you wouldn't do with a close friend or family member? Something that would really identify it as a "relationship" rather than a friendship?

I agree with this. For me, I have been thinking a lot about what would - for me - make the difference between an asexual relationship and a "common" friendship. I find it very hard to come up with something that I would want to do with the "relation-one", but not with a friend. Maybe the only thing: I would share more housy things with a partner, because there would be more time spent together. Maybe the difference would be the amount of time, spent together and for example, eating often together, one is ironing, while the other is washing up the dishes ...

When I meet a new person that I like and find interesting, I see this person as a possible friend. I wouldn't know on base of what I would decide that the other could be a potential partner. Why would I prefer one friend above the other? Maybe the only reason would be: the fact that you are more "available" for each other more than with another friend. But, I think the feeling wouldn't be different than that for an other friend.

Hi Steven,

When you are talking about such feelings as being "in love" I still think you have to ask "why". I mean if those feelings you hold for that person are more intense than those which you would normally have for just your close friends and family members-- then what exactly accounts for that extra "zing" of emotion?

Sure... you may not be interested in physically participating in a sexual act with this special someone but that doesn't mean that psychologically there isn't some sort of sexual connection there! After all, how else can one account for the extra intense feelings?

Sooo.. I am not really sure if being "in love" can truly describe an asexual or not. It seems to me to be more applicable to a person who is a sexual with a low libido.

Anyway when it comes to feelings, from my own experiences as an asexual woman, I can't say I have ever felt any sort of overwhelming love for someone that I needed to share my life with them. I have a male best friend now whom I have known for almost 10 years, but even with him I am not interested in a closer relationship.

However.... if I could design a perfect asexual relationship it would be one where I could rely on someone COMPLETELY (and they could expect the same from me). It would be an arrangement where we would pledge to take care of each other and look after each other's affairs and personal effects when one of us falls sick, etc.

Anyway... other than my requirement for reliability and loyalty, I can't say that I would be interested in living with this person in some sort of couple or partner-like relationship.

Nom

Another way I thoguth of putting it would be: for those asexuals for whom marriage (non sexual) isn't out of the question, what leads to marriage rather than just friendship? I believe, at least for myself, that the feelings of being in love (non sexual again) or having a crush, are very different from even a best friend. I am hoping at least, that should I ever be in love with an asexual woman and vice versa, that such feelings would in a way "explain their own actions", or rather, it'd be clear then what made it different from a friend.

bostongirl10y said:

Ok, so for those of you who are asexual, and yet feel you could be in a romantic, non-sexual, "monagamous" relationship: what would you do with your partner that would be special, that you wouldn't do with a close friend or family member? Something that would really identify it as a "relationship" rather than a friendship?

I agree with this. For me, I have been thinking a lot about what would - for me - make the difference between an asexual relationship and a "common" friendship. I find it very hard to come up with something that I would want to do with the "relation-one", but not with a friend. Maybe the only thing: I would share more housy things with a partner, because there would be more time spent together. Maybe the difference would be the amount of time, spent together and for example, eating often together, one is ironing, while the other is washing up the dishes ...

When I meet a new person that I like and find interesting, I see this person as a possible friend. I wouldn't know on base of what I would decide that the other could be a potential partner. Why would I prefer one friend above the other? Maybe the only reason would be: the fact that you are more "available" for each other more than with another friend. But, I think the feeling wouldn't be different than that for an other friend.

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Everyone has their own definition of what's beautiful and what's attractive and what's pleasing. Just because you don't care for it, does not mean other asexuals can't. I don't think anyone on this list is qualified to decide what is or isn't asexual.

"...but that is just me."

"...but that is just me."

"...but that is just me."

Repeat until completely imbued.

<< I have no desire to waste evenings at candle light and swooning -- how this could be fun to an asexual boggles my mind, but that is just me. >>

Everyone has their own definition of what's beautiful and what's attractive and what's pleasing. Just because you don't care for it, does not mean other asexuals can't. I don't think anyone on this list is qualified to decide what is or isn't asexual.

However.... if I could design a perfect asexual relationship it would be one where I could rely on someone COMPLETELY (and they could expect the same from me). It would be an arrangement where we would pledge to take care of each other and look after each other's affairs and personal effects when one of us falls sick, etc.

This is pretty much in line with what my "ideal" situation would be. I wouldn't be opposed to an arrangement (why marriage? It's just a bunch of legal work and hassle -- how are you supposed to explain that you would rather /not/ kiss the bride!) of this sort, and specifically for me, it would have to be somebody with similar enough interests that their projects could be eclipsed with mine. I love art, and the idea of having such an arrangement with a fellow artist would be splendid. Something that interests me even further is that after years of living with this hypothetical person, we could attain a sort of transcendent quality to this artistic communication. That, in addition to the things you listed, is my "wish," if you will. Anything more than that, and it starts to impinge upon my comfort level, and my /interest/ level. I have no desire to waste evenings at candle light and swooning -- how this could be fun to an asexual boggles my mind, but that is just me.

It is just an idea, I do not even know if it would work. I've been alone for the better part of my life, and thus my artistic endeavors have all been solitary projects. I honestly don't know if I could /handle/ joint efforts. I must say it interests me though.

Hello Grace,

Ioa has the right to express his opinion, so lighten up and get over it.

Nom

Everyone has their own definition of what's beautiful and what's attractive and what's pleasing. Just because you don't care for it, does not mean other asexuals can't. I don't think anyone on this list is qualified to decide what is or isn't asexual.

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com