Leaving a sexless relationship (tactfully)

I examine the search terms people have used to find my wordpress fairly often, and I noticed that in the past week, “leaving a sexless relationship with an asexual” was one of them.

If sex is something you need in order to feel right in a relationship with someone, a relationship with an asexual person who is not willing to have sex is not for you. Sexual incompatibility of this kind is not something that can be overcome. So this is a post about how to (tactfully) leave a sexless relationship with an asexual person if you’ve judged that a sexless relationship can’t make you happy.

The most important thing to do is to emphasize that nothing is the asexual person’s fault. Apologize for not previously communicating to the person that sex is something you need in a relationship in order to feel right, while reassuring your partner that you care for them. Emphasize that the relationship cannot simultaneously make both of you happy due to your incompatibility, and apologize for not previously being aware of this fact. Do not assign any blame at any point in the process: it is neither person’s fault if you’re incompatible.

No one enjoys a breakup, but you can reassure the person that you care about them by emphasizing that you want them to be happy in a relationship, which is impossible if they remain in a relationship with you, because it would hurt you to know they are unhappy. Apologize for any pressuring of the person that you have done in the past, and for the length of time it took you to come to the realization that a sexless relationship can’t make you happy.

You’re not automatically a bad person if a sexless romantic relationship isn’t for you. If you have needs that it is impossible for your partner to meet without being made unhappy, you are incompatible and it’s no one’s fault.

The development of gray asexuality and demisexuality as identity terms

This post is about the history of the usage of these and related terms on the Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN).

Gray asexuality is a term describing a very diverse set of experiences of sexuality where a person’s understanding of their own sexuality is enriched by the concept of asexuality, but they do not quite fit the definition of asexuality. (For people interested in reading more about what “gray asexuality” refers to, Siggy at Asexual Agenda, himself a gray asexual person, wrote an excellent post about the multiplicity of ways to see oneself as between “asexual” and “sexual.”)

The earliest mention I could find on AVEN of a theoretical identity-space between (or outside of) “asexual” and “sexual” was this post from October 2003 by AVENguy:

If anyone wants to play a fun game, go to some queer-ass conference (called something like “transcending boundaries”) and play a game where you try to think up a term/identity for every letter of the alphabet.

When you do you’ll be forced to think up new, interesting ideas like:

Semisexual

It occurs to me that we’ve got a spectrum of sexual intensity, but we don’t yet have a word for those who are halfway in between asexual and full-force sexual. I’d say that this is extremely important: right now we don’t have a way to talk about people who are asexual but maybe feel like being sexual once a year, or sexual people who are just relatively uninterested and don’t know what to do about it.

At the time AVENguy made that post, it was just speculation that there were people who could be described as semisexual. The specific term gray asexual did not come about until almost three years later in April 2006, when the user KSpaz explicitly self-identified as gray-A and defined it as descriptive of people occupying the “fuzzy” space between “asexual” and “sexual,” referencing the gradient in AVEN’s triangle logo. (It is worth noting that according to AVEN’s wiki, a proposed sexual orientation model from 1979 implies such a continuum.)

The term gray asexuality (sometimes referred to as gray sexuality) has been in usage since then in the asexual community.

The term “demisexuality” was coined a few months before “gray asexual,” by user sonofzeal, in a thread from February 2006 where he wondered if asexuals could still enjoy sexual activity. He stated in the thread that without an emotional bond with a person, he experiences no sexual attraction to the person, and he proposed “demisexual” as a term describing that phenomenon.

According to sonofzeal, with whom I recently exchanged private messages on AVEN, “demisexual” didn’t become a well-known identity term on the forum until the user OwlSaint began popularizing what it meant. In February 2008, OwlSaint wrote:

A demisexual is, in my book at least, someone who does not experience sexual attraction to people in general. I’ve yet to see a single person and think “hot” or “10 out of 10″ or “I’d like to hit that”. Sex with someone rarely crosses my mind and when it does it’s usually more along the lines of “could i force myself to with…. ew no”.

In that respect, I can and do identify as asexual.

However, with someone I’m in love with, it’s completely different, and I might as well be a “full fledged” sexual, but only with that one person. Full fledged meaning actually desiring sex, both for the physical and emotional aspect, being attracted to that special someone, and feeling sexual arousal in terms of wanting to do something on multiple levels instead of simply the biological reflex or “ugh not again”.

That to me is the definition of a demisexual. The person who invented the word may have a different definition, but that’s what it means to me. (http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/29621-demis/#entry820575)

Sonofzeal’s definition from earlier differs slightly from OwlSaint’s: sonofzeal wrote in 2006 that he conceived of himself as essentially a sexual person whose sexual attraction requires having an emotional bond with a person first, and OwlSaint conceives of themself as an essentially asexual person who has rare periods of sexual attraction triggered by emotional bonds. Ultimately, their definitions describe people who experience sexual attraction to a person only after an emotional bond has formed with that person.

The term “demisexual” has persisted in the asexual community since then.

Persons of both gray-asexual and demisexual orientations find asexuality to be a useful concept in understanding their own sexualities, and that is why they are often referred to as on the asexual spectrum. Asexuality is not a 100% accurate description for them, but understanding the concept of asexuality is necessary in understanding the concepts of demisexuality and gray asexuality.

Carnival of Aces: The Next Generation

This is for April’s Carnival of Aces.

I think it’s important to acknowledge that there are young teens in the asexual community, and I think it’s important to welcome them. While it is true that a young person’s asexual identification may change, when I discovered the online asexual community at age 14, I found it immensely empowering to learn that I was not ever required to have sex in order to be a full person.

Now that I am almost 24 and have been steeping in online asexual communities for nine years, I am appalled at the people who today would have turned a 14-year-old me away from their community. Everyone around me at that time was telling me “You’re too young to know you’re asexual,” and it would have been extremely unhelpful (and even more devastating) for the online asexual community to tell me that as well.

I look forward to the asexual community becoming more sensitive toward young people who are exploring an asexual-spectrum identity. I will always defend the agency of young people to self-identify with whatever sexual orientation labels make sense to them, and I will respect their current self-identification because that matters more than what it may become in the future. I also believe in any person’s agency to dis-identify with sexuality, especially young people’s agency, because it is extremely disempowering and absolutely a symptom of rape culture to tell someone “No, of course you’re not asexual; you have to be a sexual being; you’re too young to say you’re not currently a sexual being.”

Sexual Privilege

Sexual privilege is a phrase I haven’t used in a long time, and I thought it would be good to remind people why.

Privilege terminology ultimately comes from critical race theory, which created the concept of white privilege. White privilege refers to the set of unearned advantages granted to white people because of living in a racist society that values whiteness. White privilege as an institution harms people of color. It does not harm white people, though it makes white people complacent and more likely to harm people of color.

The cultural forces responsible for anti-asexual prejudice, however, do not function in the way that racism does. Those cultural forces do harm to more than asexual-spectrum people. Compulsory sexuality and amatonormativity (and heterosexism to a smaller degree) are the cultural forces responsible for anti-asexual prejudice.

A privilege/disprivilege dynamic doesn’t adequately explain anti-asexual prejudice because I think it is clear that non-asexual-spectrum people are harmed by being told that they must want to have (socially-acceptable) sex at any given time and that the only relationships that matter are exclusive, monogamous, romantic and sexual in nature.

“Sexual privilege” just doesn’t cut it as a useful term, and I think the members of the asexual community that still use it should discard it.

January 2013 Carnival of Aces Roundup

These are the nine submissions I’ve received for January’s carnival, whose topic was non-traditional relationship styles and polyamory.

Queenie writes about nonsexual relationships for sex-repulsed or celibate aces.

ace-muslim writes about why the concepts of queerplatonic relationships and platonic life partnerships are important.

Jo writes about a platonic relationship and the qualities that characterize it.

downwardlystatic likes the idea of having multiple romantic friendships.

Kelly reflects on how the kind of relationship she ultimately wants in her life is one like the bond she shared with her sister.

thethinkingasexual writes about being a celibate asexual relationship anarchist.

pluralalpha writes about non-traditional relationships in history.

Eponine offers advice and caution for people in mixed relationships who are considering polyamory.

Sara writes about dancing as a traditional form of nontraditional relationship.

Thank you to everyone who submitted!

Polyamory: Never a One-sided Deal, even in Mixed Relationships (Guest Post)

This is a guest post by Eponine for Janaury’s Carnival of Aces.

As an ace in a mixed (as well as poly) relationship, I’m a regular in the “For Sexual Partners, Friends and Allies” section of AVEN, where I’m seeing more and more people in mixed relationships exploring non-monogamous relationships as a possible solution. While I’m happy to see this trend, there is a mindset I often come across, which has become a pet peeve of mine: the assumption that polyamory in the context of mixed relationships means only the sexual partner needs outside partners. For example, they might say they were considering “a poly relationship for the sexual”. But – what about the asexual partner?

Once I asked a sexual partner who was considering a poly relationship, “If you want to be free to have other partners who can fulfill your sexual desire, would you also be okay with your asexual girlfriend having other partners?” He said he wouldn’t be very comfortable with the idea, and his asexual girlfriend wouldn’t want other partners anyway, because she already got everything she wanted from their relationship. So, is a poly relationship automatically considered as only a remedy to the sexual incompatibility, rather than an opportunity for both partners to embrace freedom and personal growth?

I think this mindset partly stems from the misconception “polyamory is all about sleeping around”. Even on AVEN, I’ve encountered the stereotype that poly = lots of sex. So if it’s not for sex, why seek more relationships? But in fact, polyamory means multiple loving relationships, which may or may not include sex. Even three aces can have a totally sexless poly relationship. So, in mixed relationships, both the sexual and the ace partners can possibly benefit from a poly arrangement.

Furthermore, polyamory is about willingly sharing love and intimacy, not (only) a way to fill the gaps between two partners; it means “I’ll be happy to see you happy with another partner, who can give you something I can’t provide”, not “I need another partner because you can’t fulfill all my needs, but you don’t need anyone else because you’ve already got everything”. Therefore, a poly relationship should be mutual, not one-sided. By “mutual” I mean both partners should have the freedom to have multiple partners, even if one of them chooses not to act on it.

I’ve heard of some happy mono/poly couples, where the mono partner just doesn’t want or need to have more than one partner. But the important thing is it’s their own choice, not because the poly partner doesn’t allow them to; and they’re free to seek outside relationships if they ever want to (people can change, after all). I don’t deny there must be some mixed couples like this as well, where the ace partner is completely comfortable with the sexual partner’s other relationships but doesn’t need multiple partners themself. If it works for them, that’s great. However, my point is this (or any other) arrangement should be discussed and agreed on by both parties, not decided or assumed by one of them.

Also, no one can literally have 100% of their needs fulfilled by one single person, because no two individuals are totally in sync in various kinds of desires. In mixed relationships, it often seems like the sexual incompatibility is the only problem (which can be “fixed” by letting the sexual partner have other partners on the side), but the sexual and the ace may very well differ in their other needs as well. Taking me and my partner for example, I like to have intellectual conversations, but he’s not a talkative person at all; he likes technology, sci-fi, video games and movies like The Hobbit, but I’m not into any of those things. I’ve also heard some aces say they can’t get enough non-sexual physical intimacy from their sexual partner, who would always expect sex in the end. Some people may say, “But most non-sexual needs can be fulfilled from friendships!” or “What if the ace partner just feels s/he already has every desire fulfilled?” Again, don’t assume things, but talk with your partner and find out what they think. Last but not least, even people who are very satisfied with their relationship may fall in love with someone else unexpectedly. Who knows?

Anyway, although I think there’s nothing wrong with starting to consider polyamory due to mismatched sexuality, polyamory is much more than a band-aid to a relationship. Polyamory is freedom, openness, honesty, equality, communication, compersion, opportunity for personal growth, and all these things are for everyone involved. If you’re considering a poly relationship, have a good talk with your partner and think about how each of you can possibly benefit from poly. It may turn out much more rewarding than you originally expected.

PS: If you’re curious about my personal experience with poly, please check out this old post, which fits the theme of this month’s Carnival of Aces very well too.

Search terms

In the past two weeks, people have found this blog via some search terms that I’d like to respond to.

“demisexual men”

It is no secret that I am male-identified (though loosely and only sometimes), or that I have recently begun identifying as demisexual. I am also personally acquainted with many demisexual people, both online and offline, some of whom are men.

“why gender non binary does not exist”

I assure you that non-binary experiences of gender do exist. I know because I have a non-binary experience of gender, as a person who goes between feeling loosely male and feeling completely without gender. Experiences of gender that do not fit into the Western European gender binary have existed for centuries. You can’t say that non-binary gender does not exist without arguing that non-binary people are not having the experiences of gender that they’re very clearly having.

“heteroromantic asexual impossible”

I was unaware that people were arguing that heteroromantic asexuals didn’t exist, given that it’s way more common for me to encounter people who think that asexuals can’t be anything but heteroromantic.

“demisexuality is not an orientation”

Given that the term sexual orientation as I understand it refers to the set of persons to whom a person experiences sexual attraction, and that to be demisexual is to only experience sexual attraction to the set of people with whom the person has developed emotional bonds, demisexuality very much fits the bill to be a sexual orientation. That’s all there is to it.

Call for submissions: January 2013 Carnival of Aces

It is not uncommon in the asexual community for asexuals to enter into relationships that deviate from many cultures’ norms, including but not limited to

• sexless romantic relationships, with other asexuals or with non-asexual-spectrum people
• queer/platonic relationships
• asexual polyamorous relationships

So the theme for January’s Carnival will be nontraditional relationships and polyamory. Submissions do not have to address every bullet point, and only must be relevant to asexuality and non-traditional relationship structures. Write about something you’ve explored, are exploring or would like to explore!

Please send links to your submissions to pianycist@gmail.com. If you don’t have a blog or Tumblr of your own, send the text of your submission to my email address and I will host it here.

A list of previous asexual blog carnivals can be found here: https://asexualagenda.wordpress.com/a-carnival-of-aces-masterpost/

Carnival of Aces: Sexless relationships and how to find them

This is for December’s Carnival of Aces, whose theme is Dating and Significant Others.

I have seen a lot of posts by people in the asexuality tag on Tumblr who believe that if they cannot find another asexual person as a partner, they are doomed to be without a partner for the rest of their lives. There are cultural expectations that would lead an asexual person to believe that if they do not ever want to have sex for any reason, it is not possible to have a harmonious relationship with someone who experiences sexual attraction–but I do not believe that it is impossible for a repulsed asexual to have a harmonious sexless relationship with a non-asexual-spectrum person.

Some time ago, asexual blogger Maddox wrote about his relationship with his partner who is not asexual. They do not have sex. In the post, he writes that what makes the relationship work is that the two of them share the same attitude toward the role of sex in their lives. Maddox’s partner believes that sex is not necessary in a relationship in order to define it as such, and she does not consider her sexual desires and attractions to be needs–the two of them are compatible, despite that one is asexual and one is not.

I believe there are ways to ascertain whether a non-asexual-spectrum person would be willing to be in a sexless relationship without revealing one’s asexuality or directly asking “Would you be willing to date or be in a long-term relationship with an asexual person?”

Since the purpose of initial dating is to get to know a person better, it might be appropriate to ask a person what they think the role of sex in their relationships should be, and during that conversation you could state that you don’t believe sex is necessary to have a loving and fulfilling relationship with someone. If the person disagrees with you, you will both know then that you aren’t compatible, and if they agree with you about sex not being necessary, you might consider another date with them.

I firmly believe that asexual people can have mutually fulfilling sexless relationships with people who experience sexual attraction, as long as there is a lot of communication beforehand to establish compatibility and that the subject of a sexless relationship is introduced carefully. It takes a little extra effort, but it is completely doable once you find a compatible person.

Differentiating sensual touch from sexual touch

A problem of particular interest to me, as a person who wants to participate in the philosophical academic community, concerns the definition of “sex,” or what makes something sexual. This is also a question that gets some discussion in the asexual community, especially among asexual people who experience sensual attraction.

I have experienced both sensual and sexual modes of touch in my life, with various partners. For simplicitly I’m going to put sexual partners and sensual partners in a category called “touch partners,” because none of the touch involved romantic feelings.

With various touch partners, I have experienced intense sensual touch as well as intense sexual touch, and there is no difference in intensity for me. I have experienced sexual arousal during sensual touch, and I have had the experience of being completely un-aroused during sexual touch—although it is worth noting that being completely un-aroused during sexual touch makes a person more likely to experience pain instead of pleasure in certain body parts if you’re not careful. Sensual touch and sexual touch can both be gentle.

In my experience, sensual and sexual touches do not categorically have any differences in intensity, gentleness, or the presence or absence of arousal. Neither intensity, gentleness nor arousal determine whether touch is sensual or sexual. Also, whether or not you’re touching someone’s gentials or not makes no difference: it is possible to sexually touch someone’s arm and sensually touch a person’s genitals or nipples.

What makes the difference for me is that a sense of urgency is a hallmark of sexual touch. Sexual touch often involves a need to either maintain or increase arousal, so urgency as a defining quality of sexual touch makes sense.

Sensual touch for me, by contrast, does not involve any sense of urgency. Since there is no urgency, there is no feeling (or much less feeling) of pressure to perform, or pressure that one is inadequate. The goal of sensual touch is only pleasure–never arousal or orgasm, though it is possible for those things to occur during sensual touch for people whose skin is particularly sensitive.

Though I can enjoy sexual touch very much, I vastly prefer sensual touch, and I’m only really interested in pursuing new modes of sensual touch. I hope that my differentiation of the two terms is as helpful to other people in the asexual community as it has been for me.