Poll: Would you date an asexual person?

[Gultark]

No, physical acts are a massive part of a relationship, not just for sexual gratification but also for forging deep emotion bonds that are otherwise next to impossible to create.
As shallow as it seems to vote no, having a healthy sex life is one of the most important things in maintaining a healthy, happy relationships. (Far from the only thing but important nonetheless.)

From my point of view denying a major natural biological urge for your partner, even if you truly love them, will accomplish nothing but breed resentment, especially in a long term commitment.

 

[Lambi]

I don't understand why we need another label for that. I just assume a transsexual person counts as whatever gender they are trying to be. So it fits under bisexuality as far as I'm concerned. If I am attracted to either male of female partners a hermaphrodite doesn't seem like much of a leap, so that fits too.

Maybe I'm thinking about this to much.

LoL according to the wiki article, I'm transgendered because I believe that male-female gender roles imposed by society are outdated and need to go. I didn't know that either.

Yes, I should know all about how a transgendered person refers to themselves as the gender they associate themselves as, seeing as I have a few transgendered friends and have dated two transgenders, and I always refer to them as the gender they associate themselves as. But not everyone is as open minded as I am, and I know some people who wouldn't want to so much as touch someone that's transgendered, sadly.

Same would apply to someone that's a hermaphrodite. It would probably weird someone out if they saw someone with both sets of goodies or knew they had both. To me, it wouldn't matter, so long as I loved that person or at least liked them.

I don't blame you if you are thinking about this too much. But I identify myself as a pansexual and would like it if people would respect me for wanting to do so.

 

[Julianking93]

Well, I currently am dating an asexual, so there's that.

A relationship doesn't hinge on sexual activity. It's about how well you get on with that person and how much you love them.
Basing a relationship entirely on sex is just ridiculous.

Sex is nice in a relationship, but it can ruin things just as easily.
Simply put, if you love someone, it doesn't matter how much or how little you have sex.

Odd that I'm currently listening to a song called Love Addict right now which only talks about fucking >.>

 

[Togs]

Speaking as an asexual person my limited number of relationships have all ended with the other party loosing interest due to the reason you stated.

TO me it sounds like a rather grim realisation but sex does seem to be the glue that holds relationships together.

 

[Verlander]

I wonder how many people who claim to be "asexual" actually are? Like those kids who go through that confused stage, and claim to be bi sexual/gay, when really they are just confused by the fact that they can actually show appreciation for attractive people of the same sex? I've also noticed (on this site, and in real life) a LOT of "asexual" people seem to be nerds and suchlike.

I just want to throw this out there, that having bad/no sexual experiences, or having a deep resentment of attractive people, doesn't necessarily make you asexual...

Disclaimer: I'm not pointing out any individual, or anyone specifically on this thread or site. Just interested in the actual number of asexual people. Someone earlier said that 1% of the population was asexual, and I'm certain that's a vast exaggeration.

How many asexual people have you actually talked to? Asexuals are as human and as diverse in their interests as everyone else and you might want to do a bit of research before generalizing and stereotyping us into a derogatory category. You might want to go to the AVEN forum itself, it's one of the larger places for asexuals to chat and debate on the web. I happen to be an artist, a philosopher, an avid weightlifter and cyclist, and absolutely nuts about my project car.

Asexuality is lack of sexual attraction, nothing more nothing less. I know I am asexual from my experiences and intuitive feelings, I have never felt sexually attracted to anyone, including a person I fell in love with, there was never a thought nor a desire to ever "jump her bones" so to speak.

The 1% estimation is based on a very old study called the Kinsey report (old enough that it was old when George Bataille talked about it). Obviously it is not going to be an even distribution throughout the population, as some areas will have more asexuals, with some having less, there's no real efficient way to determine the actual number right now. Some people are even indifferent about their lack of sexual attraction to anyone that they don't notice it unless the conception of asexuality as an orientation is introduced to them, so they might not identify as asexual.

A few. Not many because it's not something that people generally bring up in conversation. It was more of an observation of the people who "claim" to be, and the people who actually are. I'm prepared to believe that a lot of people confused with their sexual orientation might relate to asexuality, but not actually be asexual. I wasn't making a derogatory comment about those who actually are asexual, more a comment on how those who feel socially rejected (such as "nerds") may claim to be, but not actually be.

Perhaps. But I'm aromantic, so I'll probably never know.

I've seen this term being bandied around, so I looked it up. It showed on Wikipedia like this:

Spoiler: Definitions of terms regarding romance among asexuals

Asexuals, while typically lacking in sexual desire for either sex, may engage in purely emotional romantic relationships.[19][20][21] Terms concerning this:
aromantic: lack of romantic attraction towards anyone of any gender
biromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of either gender
heteroromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of the opposite gender
homoromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of the same gender
panromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of any gender or lack of gender
transromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of variant or ambiguous gender
polyromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of more than one gender or sex but without implying, as biromantic does, that there are only two genders or sexes

Does that make you asexual as well, or not?

Romantic attraction and sexual attraction are never necessarily the same. I am a hetero romantic asexual, hence, I am romantically attracted to the opposite gender (I do indeed 'fall in love', for the layman). Aromantic people do not become romantically attracted to any gender, often their relationships stay fairly platonic. It is quite possible to have homoromantic heterosexuals or hetero romantic homosexuals (which could account for some people who identify as bisexual, and even aromantic sexual people as well. It really depends on the person, human sexuality and gender are very diverse. Many people often use their own combination of romantic attraction and sexual attraction as the norm (hence all the people believing arelationship requires sex as well as love when it doesn't have to be the case). Why they do that is a whole other bag of worms with metaphysical and psychological implications that I don't want to get into right now (suffice to say it would require a lot of writing and I'm busy with essays on Hegel and Foucault right now).

Ah, good ol' Michel Foucault. I don't envy you, glad my essay writing days are long over. This wasn't directed at you, so your reply did nothing to enlighten me. I was asking is he was asexual, because I'm interested if sexually active beings were defining themselves as aromantic. Purely because it seems like a cop out way of explaining that they're a dick. With asexuals, I can easily understand this predicament. With sexually active people... not so much.

 

[p3t3r]

not for long. i'm a 16 year old a guy give me a break

 

[justnotcricket]

Unfortunately, I don't think so. I think it would make both of us unhappy, because sex is important to me. I would end up unfulfilled, and feeling like I was pressuring them or resenting them for not wanting to have sex, and they would feel (I assume) uncomfortable, perhaps pressured, perhaps unhappy because they couldn't give me what I wanted.

I could love a person who was asexual, but for me, chaste love and committed romantic relationships are not ultimately compatible. They would be much better off with someone who shares their feelings about sex, with me as a friend =)

 

[Hader]

I don't think I could. Dating usually involves a certain amount of sexual attraction in the first place. If that isn't present for someone, I can't see it being easy to move into any serious relationship.

 

[Zaleznikel]

Ugh, the lack of understanding in this thread upsets me.

An asexual person that wants to date is likely has a romantic orientation. I'm homoromantic, I'm attracted to other men, and I want to go on dates, kiss, cuddle, but I don't really want to go any further. Maybe at some point when I'm very comfortable with a person I'll try it.

I can totally understand asexuality being a deal-breaker, especially in our sexually charged culture, but I want people who read this thread to understand that some asexuals DO find other people physically attractive, they DO form strong emotional bonds, and they DO want something a little stronger than just friendship. They just don't want sex.

I wont blame anyone I date if they don't want to be monogamous or don't want to continue dating. I will be understanding, and I think most asexuals will understand the position that they are in.

You should be a little more understanding too.

 

[Alexias_Sandar]

Complicated. I could see loving such, but...they'd have to be willing to accept me looking for certain things elsewhere if they aren't interested. I certainly wouldn't enjoy sex with someone who isn't actually interested personally, and asking them to bed me wouldn't feel right. At the same time, I'm a very tactile person, and well. Yeah, I don't do too well with too long without.

 

[Eldarion]

I don't understand why we need another label for that. I just assume a transsexual person counts as whatever gender they are trying to be. So it fits under bisexuality as far as I'm concerned. If I am attracted to either male of female partners a hermaphrodite doesn't seem like much of a leap, so that fits too.

Maybe I'm thinking about this to much.

LoL according to the wiki article, I'm transgendered because I believe that male-female gender roles imposed by society are outdated and need to go. I didn't know that either.

Yes, I should know all about how a transgendered person refers to themselves as the gender they associate themselves as, seeing as I have a few transgendered friends and have dated two transgenders, and I always refer to them as the gender they associate themselves as. But not everyone is as open minded as I am, and I know some people who wouldn't want to so much as touch someone that's transgendered, sadly.

Same would apply to someone that's a hermaphrodite. It would probably weird someone out if they saw someone with both sets of goodies or knew they had both. To me, it wouldn't matter, so long as I loved that person or at least liked them.

I don't blame you if you are thinking about this too much. But I identify myself as a pansexual and would like it if people would respect me for wanting to do so.

I just don't think that way. I believe that femininity and masculinity are traits independent of your actual gender. So a more feminine male or a more masculine female isn't strange to me. Its just varying levels of individuality. Same goes for sexual orientation, everyone is attracted to the human form it just varies how much attraction goes to what traits. I don't understand the need for such black and white labels. It oversimplifies a very complicated subject.

Not to disrespect your stance on the matter, but I have always thought of myself relatively equally attracted to certain male and female partners. That didn't rule out anything else in the slightest. I thought that was just bisexual. Have I using the wrong label for myself in the context of those labels?

 

[Ham_authority95]

Nope. Sex is something I want at every opportunity in a relationship, so it wouldn't work out.

I know that romance can still exist with asexual people, but it wouldn't be as fun for me without the sex .

 

[Ham_authority95]

Unfortunately, I don't think so. I think it would make both of us unhappy, because sex is important to me. I would end up unfulfilled, and feeling like I was pressuring them or resenting them for not wanting to have sex, and they would feel (I assume) uncomfortable, perhaps pressured, perhaps unhappy because they couldn't give me what I wanted.

Oh, I also agree with this. Relationships should be mutually enjoyable.

 

[Lambi]

I just don't think that way. I believe that femininity and masculinity are traits independent of your actual gender. So a more feminine male or a more masculine female isn't strange to me. Its just varying levels of individuality. Same goes for sexual orientation, everyone is attracted to the human form it just varies how much attraction goes to what traits. I don't understand the need for such black and white labels. It oversimplifies a very complicated subject.

Not to disrespect your stance on the matter, but I have always thought of myself relatively equally attracted to certain male and female partners. That didn't rule out anything else in the slightest. I thought that was just bisexual. Have I using the wrong label for myself in the context of those labels?

Maybe it does oversimplify, but I identify myself as pansexual, just like someone else identifies themselves as bisexual or straight.

Not really. You can always get to know other kinds of sexualities and see which one fits you, but if you identify yourself as bisexual, then I say you should continue doing so unless you find out you can identify yourself as another sexuality that fits you better.

 

[Rayne870]

Let's say you meet an asexual guy/girl who is heteromantic/homoromantic (Depending on your gender/sexual orientation). The two of you get along great and develop feelings for each other, do you think you could engage in a long term relationship with someone even if the two of you will probably never have sex?

Come to think of all this...why would an asexual even want to date. Assuming they would probably have no sex drive why would they seek the companionship that goes with it and not be sated by having a meaningful relationship but not in such a way that cock blocks someone else. Thinking something like Boss and Naked Snake.

 

[Ace of Spades]

If kissing is okay, then I'd be okay with that. Sex isn't a necessary component of a relationship. Desirable, but unnecessary.

 

[Darkauthor81]

To what end? If I am not getting laid out of a relationship then its just like having a really annoying female friend who clings to me non stop and cock blocks me.
Relationships are about sex chap.

So no. Would not date but if we got on on a personal level then no reason not to be friends.

While I am way too horny of a person to date an asexual person, relationships aren't as much about sex as you seem to think. If you can't stand the person when there's no sex happening, you're not in a relationship. You're fuck buddies. There's a significant difference.

 

[trooper6]

I would not date an asexual person. Dating for me is about cultivating a sexual/romanic relationship. An asexual person would not be into a sexual relationship, so that wouldn't work out for me. For me, also, romantic and sexual go hand in hand, I want them both together and wouldn't be happy with romance without sex.

However! I would certainly be friends with an asexual person, maybe even be best friends. We could hang out and talk and be friends, in a totally nonsexual way. Which shouldn't be a problem since the asexual also doesn't want a sexual relationship with me, right?

ETA: One of the things that is really important to my romantic relationships is *desire.* I want to be desired and to desire in return...and then I want to manifest that desire physically and have the physical intimacy that come fulfilling that. Also note: I have a broad definition of sex, including mutual masturbation, oral, etc. But if none of those things are happening...none of the being naked before each other in that sort of vulnerability...I'm not going to be happy in that relationship.

Additionally, I'm *also* not going to be happy with a one-sided sexual relationship where only one of us are giving or receiving. I want some balance.

 

[Elf Defiler Korgan]

Done it.

It didn't really go very far. Yeah we had shared interests, she wore that asexual label proudly though, so the gates of paradise were well-barred. We broke up over the incredibly trendy and green stances she took, which she was so avid to defend and insist there was nothing wrong with valuing humans over animals at all (the illustrative example of the pony who rapes a person and gets away scott free since he is special and above being put-down by police or the courts still tops my hypptheticals on this issue). Oh and she threatened my life (the consequence of a human having so little value again I suppose). Not so great. One could say asexual but not without some seriously violent de-humanising emotion in there.

Where it gets funny is what happens next. She goes overseas, gets an eye infection and dies on the op table. Maybe modern surgery doesn't work on would-be druids? Gaia says no?

Course dealing with the grief was then easy. She didn't like humans, she didn't especially want to be around or a human, so she got lucky with being killed off young. She... won?

 

[RedMagic]

I don't see why not. Sex is just one of many aspects of romance, but I can understand how this can be a deal-breaker for some.