Asexuality and Romantic Relationships

How do you define sexual attraction then? I also go into the confused corner.

Being aroused by. Having a sensation of desire for sexual intimacy for. So on and so forth.

As opposed to romantic attraction, which is the desire to hold an emotional bond with.

I thought I knew asexuality. Aishkiz's post threw me off.

In its simplest form, asexuality is not being interested in the act of sex. It doesn't necessarily mean that the person finds in unpleasant, or repulsive or anything else. It doesn't mean that they necessarily get no pleasure from sexual stimulation. They simply aren't interested in it for themselves.

Some more things that asexuality doesn't mean:

• It doesn't mean that they don't want or desire emotional intimacy.
• It doesn't mean that they are uninterested in romance or romantic feelings.
• It doesn't mean that they are unable to love.
• It doesn't mean that they are unaware of physical beauty.

edited 1st Feb '11 2:32:39 PM by Madrugada

"It doesn't mean that they necessarily get no pleasure from sexual stimulation."

To me, asexuality does mean that. I'd call someone who experiences sexual pleasure but no sex drive 'hyposexual' - an asexual person (like me) lacks both of those.

Hyposexual means a reduced but present sex drive.

As I said, a straight man can have sex with another man and find the orgasm pleasurable. They just don't find the guy sexually attractive. Same thing with asexuality, though I wouldn't be surprised if most found it less pleasurable without the drive to itch.

edited 1st Feb '11 3:07:00 PM by Miijhal

:/

Really? Because from what I've read, asexuals who had alone time felt the same amount of pleasure one would get from digesting their food. It was just a biological function.

I understand asexuality to be a lack of being aroused by people. I mean, you might look at someone and think 'they're attractive', but you don't really want to sleep with them, nor does looking at them make you want sex in general.

And lack of a sex drive doesn't necessarily mean you wouldn't enjoy sex if it came along - just that you don't actively feel a need for it.

I think for one thing asexuality is an umbrella term that covers a number of different natures, which is part of the confusion. Not all asexuals are asexual in the same way.

I think for one thing asexuality is an umbrella term that covers a number of different natures, which is part of the confusion. Not all asexuals are asexual in the same way.

I think another part of the problem is that the term "asexual" has undergone memetic mutation, and tends to cover a lot of ambiguity.

For example, I've seen the term "asexual" used to describe a lot of crazy things, like people that don't link sexual desire with romance.

But... uh... that would be most people?

Brain not like.

like people that don't link sexual desire with romance.

Uhm...technically speaking, if they don't have sexual desire but have romance, they are asexual.

Or is that not what you meant?

Okay, asexuals are still aware of physical attractiveness. So, would they prefer to have sex with a sexy person, or would the person's appearance not really matter as far as sex is concerned?

Asexuals would probably prefer not to have sex. Beyond that, you can't lump them all as having the same preference than you can lump "all gay guys" or "all pre-op M-to-F transgendered people".

Why the need to try to stuff entire groups into a tidy little pigeonhole? People don't work that way.