Black Dog Running

greenchestnuts:

ceratopsian:

I’m well aware that people can have sex with someone that they’re not attracted to, even though I don’t consider it a healthy basis for a sexual relationship.

Not all significant attraction is sexual. Many romantic asexuals have sex with people they’re strongly romantically attracted to but not at all sexually attracted to.

  And I never said that gay men never sleep with women.  I just said that your hypothetical scenario of “gay man sleeps with woman he is not sexually attracted to in any way whatsoever in order to feel emotionally intimate with her” is ridiculous.

Then I don’t know what to tell you. It makes perfect sense in my world.

Because you know their sexual orientation better than they do, apparently.

Or I’ve just noticed that their descriptions of their sexuality (or supposed lack of) are indistinguishable from everyone else’s.  Like the blackdogrunning post from earlier that you mentioned, which says that she likes sex because she enjoys the physical intimacy with her boyfriend, touching his skin, feeling trusted, and even that she thinks that he’s gorgeous and likes seeing him naked.  How is this not sexual attraction?

That’s a question for blackdogrunning; I’m not going to speak for her. Presumably she doesn’t find him sexy. Honestly, I had more to say here, but the idea of speculating about the details of someone else’s sexual relationship is grossing me out.

ETA: I was thinking about this, and I still have no interest in speculating on blackdogrunning’s relationship, but I can try to answer it from my point of view. None of what I describe is necessary for being asexual— except not experiencing sexual attraction, obviously— nor is it universal, but it’s what it means for me not to experience sexual attraction.

I have no “desire” or “drive” to have partnered sex. I could go the rest of my life without having partnered sex and be happy. It’s more than just a possibility— as an aromantic, I tend not to form the kinds of relationships where sex happens. And I’m okay with the lack of partnered sex. Were I to be in a relationship where sex “typically” happens, if my partner and I could both get all the things we get from sex without actually engaging in genital hockey, I’d be cool with that. Orgasms and sexual pleasure are, to me and for me, inherently private things; sometimes sharing them is good for the mutual benefits it brings, but any orgasm is still just an orgasm. In a relationship-with-sex, I’d probably be less interested in it than my partner (and this has been the case previously); to me, sex is just another thing you can do together. It’s not particularly special. (I consider this separate from my sex drive, which is pretty normal AFAIK.)

Also, people tend not to turn me on, either mentally or physically. I have a few specific kinks that revolve around abstract concepts (so no people) and that do turn me on, so I know the difference.

It’s what I consider the distinction between want and desire, and I think the English language is very confusing with what it uses the word “want” for. I have no visceral feelings at all about partnered sex. When I was a teenager, I was confused by the fact that many of my peers were having sex, because I couldn’t understand their motivations. Not in a judging way— “I’m perplexed as to why you’re doing that” is different from “You shouldn’t be doing that.” (And I’m not saying anybody owed me any explanation or justification or anything like that, and I certainly didn’t go around asking for one!)

Also, I’m puzzled by why, if you’re emphasizing the inherent fluidity of sexual orientation and pointing out that sometimes gay men experience occasional sexual attraction to women (which is what I think you’re saying), you’re also so intent on arguing that grey-asexuality, which is an identity that by definition embraces this fluidity, doesn’t exist.

As I’ve noted before, you’re the only one I’ve ever seen saying that grey-ace as a “sexually fluid” identity, and there are people who will say otherwise.  Every other time I’ve seen it defined, including your original definition, it was always about being sexually attracted to a limited number of people and only wanting to have sex sometimes.  I consider it to be a nonsensical identity because this applies to everyone to some degree.  It’s like making up a term for “person who eats food” and acting like it constitutes some sort of unique minority population.

Also, I dislike the term “fluid”, but I would say that sexuality is complicated.  Sexual attraction comes in varying degrees of intensity, is not always seen as such by the person experiencing it, and can be influenced by many factors.  But internet asexual communities constantly narrow sexual attraction down to “I looked at this person and instantly turned into a cat in heat”. 

What I meant by “sexually fluid” is actually very much in line with the link you provided: mostly asexual, but with some instances of experiencing sexual attraction, similar to the analogy of a gay man having a few instances of sexual attraction to a woman.

And the AVEN definition, which I provided, is not limited to being sexually attracted to a limited number of people and only wanting to have sex sometimes. It includes experiencing limited sexual attraction in general— ie, not necessarily on a per-person basis, but, say, a man who’s sexually attracted to his boyfriend a few times over the course of each year. It also describes people who have sexual attraction but a low sex drive— obviously, if they feel like no other label fits them, and if they feel like their low sex drive is an important factor in their sexuality.

Yes, hello, Hi. Bagheist here, the person who’s sex life and orientation you guys are talking about. Thought I might answer some questions, since ceratopsian hasn’t taken up the sugestion to ask me to clarify.

(also, thanks greenchestnuts, for not speculating. I’ve had enough people speculate on it already, so I honestly thank you for not doing so, and answering as you would react. )

First, before I go into anything, please please please do not call Methrend my boyfriend. Please. That is not the term I associate with him, that is a term I associate with a not pleasant relationship I’ve had, so do not do it.(Also, it’s inaccurate!) 

That said. Let’s tackle this bit by bit.

she likes sex because she enjoys the physical intimacy with her boyfriend, touching his skin, feeling trusted, and even that she thinks that he’s gorgeous and likes seeing him naked.  How is this not sexual attraction?

Ok. Let’s start this again.

I like preforming a physical activity with my partner. Because I like him as a person. And thus doing basically anything with him is enjoyed in my book. He enjoys having sex, because he is sexually attracted to me. (We both enjoy it because it feels good. Nerves are nerves, the biology behind this is not my department to educate on)

Sex is just one way we are intimate. But, given that it was the topic, I wasn’t going to go on and on about how I also really like talking with him, or hugging him, or stroking his hand (because see above point and below point).

I like touching his skin because it has a very nice texture.

I like feeling trusted by my partner, therefore…it’s sexual attraction. Nope! I like feeling trusted by my partner, because neither of us trust easily, and thus that we trust eachother is special! The fact we are ok with being goofy around eachother, and being unguarded, it is nice to be reminded of! because to be frank, there is not very many people (i.e. none) that I can be as unguarded around as I am with Methrend.

Background here: I’ve done quite a bit of nude life drawings. Enough that, when I see a nude person, generally I start calculating and thinking through how I would draw them. I’m not sure if you’ve done life drawing, but it’s not a sexual thing. Even other people who are of an orientation which could be sexually attacred to the model in question have said it’s not sexual.

Also, you will note I deliberately did not use ‘sexy man’. Because I don’t find him sexy. I don’t find anyone sexy, it’s not a word I actually understand. I know what context it can be used in, what it it means, but I do not understand the sentiment behind it. Not sure if it’s a quirk of my vocabulary, from the aforementioned lifedrawing, or what, but gorgeous and sexy are not synonyms.

Gorgeous = looks extremely good, cohesive, aesthetically pleasing (in the case of Methrend is someone I care about most in the world)

Sexy = ‘unnnf’ I find this person sexually attractive (I might not know them but) I want to shag them BECAUSE OF HOW THEY LOOK. This is all description of what people I have asked to define sexy  have replied with. This is not something I actually understand.

That said - nude people! they’re interesting looking! Methrend! I care about him! Therefore, nude Methrend is both extremely interesting looking (more than his base line of “hey awesome here is this person I care so much about, they mean lots and so they look awesome because of linking of meaning”), and you know, Methrend. And so really awesome in my book.

If you’ve got any questions or whatever, and can be civil about asking them, feel free to shoot me an ask (or multiple asks). 

This does go for everyone, but remember I am busy so I might be slow to answer occasionally. Also, remember tumblr eats them.

(Source: quoth-the-ravenclaw)