asexuality and romantic relationships

[maydayp_p]

DXnobodyX

WobinA

DXnobodyX

It sounds like a lot of hassle, paritcularly in distracting yourself.

It is a hassle. Just like homosexuals had to go through, and still go through to this day. But distraction really isn't a big deal when you don't think about something to begin with.

In an environment where less and less is given a damn about your sexuality why bring it up let alone feel the need to make assumptions that you don't have one.

because society may not care WHAT you are, but it's still very very sexual. basic assumptions
you will have sex
you will marry/have a long term relationship*
*or have a s**t load of one-nighters, or short term affairs.
you will have kids (unless infertile, or successful in BC use)
you will date SOMEONE
you will have crushes on people and want to sleep with them.
did I mention you will have sex?

if you do not meet up with one of these standards people will judge you, ridicule you and dismiss you. for example, I mentioned that I don't plan on having kids, the two people who were listening to me (neither had kids, one is younger then me) told me I'd change my mind one day. 99% of the people I've told about my sexuality tell me (even if not immediately) that they think that I just haven't found the right person yet. one person said, "I think one day, your going to hope into bed with some one, and then you'll be hooked" ie. you just need to get laid. also, annoying family comments, about having babies, or "I could do worse" then dating a guy I know who did/does have a crush on me. I don't need 'em but those are from people who don't know/realize I'm an asexual aromantic.

basically because I'm an asexual aromantic people assume they have the right to tell me they know me better then myself, and know my sexuality, my body, and hormonal reactions bettern then me. the one who's actually experancing these things.

[maydayp_p]

Their Satanic Prince

CH1YO

The New Wineskin

CH1YO

The New Wineskin

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

facepalm.exe

Sexuality is a human thing. Mitosis is not involved.

No it isn't.

You seem confused as to what a sexuality is.

So do you. There are people who lack all types of things from empathy to eyesight. You don't think it's possible for someone to be born without the ability to become sexually aroused?

neither being asexual or aromantic remove a person's ability to become aroused. trust me. I often wish it did. it's quite annoying.
asexuality is lack of attraction to people not lack of libito. people who are asexual still have wet dreams, morning stiffies, masterbate, etc.

[maydayp_p]

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

I really really should ignore this post...

asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetro', homo', and pansexuality.

[CH1YO]

maydayp_p

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

I really really should ignore this post...

asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetro', homo', and pansexuality.

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

[maydayp_p]

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

I really really should ignore this post...

asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetro', homo', and pansexuality.

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

[CH1YO]

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

I really really should ignore this post...

asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetro', homo', and pansexuality.

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

[maydayp_p]

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

I really really should ignore this post...

asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetro', homo', and pansexuality.

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

vague comparisons do not cut it. why do you think asexuality doesn't cut it as a accurate and valid orientation

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

[CH1YO]

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

No, it does not function. Luckily asexuality is a myth.

I really really should ignore this post...

asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetro', homo', and pansexuality.

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

vague comparisons do not cut it. why do you think asexuality doesn't cut it as a accurate and valid orientation

It is defined as an absence of what you claim it to be.

[maydayp_p]

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

vague comparisons do not cut it. why do you think asexuality doesn't cut it as a accurate and valid orientation

It is defined as an absence of what you claim it to be.

which doesn't make it a myth or invalid. it is just one more thing that proves humans are not good at make up languages. especial with the english language. full of contradictions.
it would be a myth or invalid if no one ever identified as an asexual. asexuality is like the albino of sexuality. albinos have no pigment in their skin, hair, eyes, etc. it doesn't make it an invalid appearance. when you look at a ray of light (defracted, like in a rainbow, or through a crystal) there is no pink, does pink still exist?

[CH1YO]

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

vague comparisons do not cut it. why do you think asexuality doesn't cut it as a accurate and valid orientation

It is defined as an absence of what you claim it to be.

which doesn't make it a myth or invalid. it is just one more thing that proves humans are not good at make up languages. especial with the english language. full of contradictions.
it would be a myth or invalid if no one ever identified as an asexual. asexuality is like the albino of sexuality. albinos have no pigment in their skin, hair, eyes, etc. it doesn't make it an invalid appearance. when you look at a ray of light (defracted, like in a rainbow, or through a crystal) there is no pink, does pink still exist?

We're fantastic with language, we can even define things.
Albinos are not invisible, if that was what it meant then it would be an invalid appearance. As it is they simply have a deficiency of melanin, which is not the extent of appearance.
Magenta is a mixture of red and blue.

[Mordeckai]

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

vague comparisons do not cut it. why do you think asexuality doesn't cut it as a accurate and valid orientation

It is defined as an absence of what you claim it to be.

Let me ask this. It there such a thing as darkness, cold, evil?
The answer is no, they are only the lack of light, heat, and good(ness?). However, that doesn't mean we cannot define that lack of whatever. We still say that something is twice as cold, eventhough it, be definition, cannot be possible since measuring by a lack of something cannot be defined without an upperbound. Back on topic, asexuality is just zero on a measurement of sexuality.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, you can define an absence of many things.

[CH1YO]

Mordeckai

Let me ask this. It there such a thing as darkness, cold, evil?
The answer is no, they are only the lack of light, heat, and good(ness?). However, that doesn't mean we cannot define that lack of whatever. We still say that something is twice as cold, eventhough it, be definition, cannot be possible since measuring by a lack of something cannot be defined without an upperbound. Back on topic, asexuality is just zero on a measurement of sexuality.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, you can define an absence of many things.

Pretty much.

[Pipe Private]

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

maydayp_p

CH1YO

It is as valid as pansexuality. That is why I reject it as myth.

pansexuality is a valid sexuality. whether you consider bisexuality an subsection of it, or it of bisexuality.
and so does asexuality.
but since you do not agree with pansexuality I'll rephrase.
asexuality is not a myth, psyc disorder or anything else. it is a valid sexuality like hetrosexuality, homosexuality.

Asexuality is not a valid sexuality; just like an Amish buggy is not a valid automobile.

vague comparisons do not cut it. why do you think asexuality doesn't cut it as a accurate and valid orientation

It is defined as an absence of what you claim it to be.

Sort of like how Atheism isn't a religion. This would be like saying 'asexuality' must be its own odd category.

-shrug-

Well, I myself am 25 and still a virgin. I've been on one date and I'm not even sure if it really counts as a date. I had one crush on one guy and he turned out to be gay. xp -snort-

So, yeah. I guess I just haven't found the right one, yet. xp Or maybe I have some deeply embedded psychological fear of sex. Or maybe I get turned off by thinking about how people like to shove their hands or faces to the very areas of our bodies where urine and fecal matter regularly extrude? ._. I've always found that interesting. People are so particular about washing their hands after going to the bathroom, but all bets are off once it's time to tango.


Yup, I've had a crush before. And it's more like I'd love to have cuddled with the dude (spooning and that sort of thing) and maybe even kissing (I have never been kissed in a romantic manner, either) and touching. But so far, that dude's been the only one.

Ohyeah, and if this is relevant in any way, I'm Atheist, myself. xD

[dxnobodyx]

maydayp_p

DXnobodyX

WobinA

DXnobodyX

It sounds like a lot of hassle, paritcularly in distracting yourself.

It is a hassle. Just like homosexuals had to go through, and still go through to this day. But distraction really isn't a big deal when you don't think about something to begin with.

In an environment where less and less is given a damn about your sexuality why bring it up let alone feel the need to make assumptions that you don't have one.

because society may not care WHAT you are, but it's still very very sexual. basic assumptions
you will have sex
you will marry/have a long term relationship*
*or have a s**t load of one-nighters, or short term affairs.
you will have kids (unless infertile, or successful in BC use)
you will date SOMEONE
you will have crushes on people and want to sleep with them.
did I mention you will have sex?

if you do not meet up with one of these standards people will judge you, ridicule you and dismiss you. for example, I mentioned that I don't plan on having kids, the two people who were listening to me (neither had kids, one is younger then me) told me I'd change my mind one day. 99% of the people I've told about my sexuality tell me (even if not immediately) that they think that I just haven't found the right person yet. one person said, "I think one day, your going to hope into bed with some one, and then you'll be hooked" ie. you just need to get laid. also, annoying family comments, about having babies, or "I could do worse" then dating a guy I know who did/does have a crush on me. I don't need 'em but those are from people who don't know/realize I'm an asexual aromantic.

basically because I'm an asexual aromantic people assume they have the right to tell me they know me better then myself, and know my sexuality, my body, and hormonal reactions bettern then me. the one who's actually experancing these things.

Should it not be sexual? just because you do not follow these norms isn't proof of the opposite.

[maydayp_p]

DXnobodyX

maydayp_p

DXnobodyX

WobinA

DXnobodyX

It sounds like a lot of hassle, paritcularly in distracting yourself.

It is a hassle. Just like homosexuals had to go through, and still go through to this day. But distraction really isn't a big deal when you don't think about something to begin with.

In an environment where less and less is given a damn about your sexuality why bring it up let alone feel the need to make assumptions that you don't have one.

because society may not care WHAT you are, but it's still very very sexual. basic assumptions
you will have sex
you will marry/have a long term relationship*
*or have a s**t load of one-nighters, or short term affairs.
you will have kids (unless infertile, or successful in BC use)
you will date SOMEONE
you will have crushes on people and want to sleep with them.
did I mention you will have sex?

if you do not meet up with one of these standards people will judge you, ridicule you and dismiss you. for example, I mentioned that I don't plan on having kids, the two people who were listening to me (neither had kids, one is younger then me) told me I'd change my mind one day. 99% of the people I've told about my sexuality tell me (even if not immediately) that they think that I just haven't found the right person yet. one person said, "I think one day, your going to hope into bed with some one, and then you'll be hooked" ie. you just need to get laid. also, annoying family comments, about having babies, or "I could do worse" then dating a guy I know who did/does have a crush on me. I don't need 'em but those are from people who don't know/realize I'm an asexual aromantic.

basically because I'm an asexual aromantic people assume they have the right to tell me they know me better then myself, and know my sexuality, my body, and hormonal reactions bettern then me. the one who's actually experancing these things.

Should it not be sexual? just because you do not follow these norms isn't proof of the opposite.

I've bolded the main part of your question I was responding to. also, even if I was not asexual I would still not be wanting kids, thus getting flack for that.
personally I don't care if society is overy sexual. I do want it to be at least some what accepting though. or to reitterate I don't think people should "assume they have the right to tell me they know me better then myself, and know my sexuality, my body, and hormonal reactions bettern then me. the one who's actually experancing these thing" no matter what I am.