Relationship Poll

[Cavernio]

Re: Relationship Poll

Ok well by that definition I'm asexual because physical features generally aren't what turn me on. But there's no freakin way in hell I'm identifying as asexual.

[Toxophilis]

Re: Relationship Poll

There is no way that is true. That would make the term asexual entirely useless. In fact I would probably even fit under that description and I am no way asexual.

It's basically like you are saying that everyone who isn't a shallow and only judges people based on sex is asexual. To me it sounds like you are just making up definitions to fulfill your personal beliefs. You can describe yourself however you want, but trying to make it fit into an unrelated broader definition isn't the way to do it.

Ah, I see your religious. Never mind. Just do whatever you want.

You're twisting my words. Are you telling me that you have never been sexually attracted to the way someone looks? That is what I mean. I guess it did come off as a spiteful tone but then so has every message directed at me and choof (if he's being serious about this).

And yeah, I'm not religious, that's why I changed the boobs thing from 'gods gift' which was a figure of speech not a literal thing.

EDIT: I am saying looks because, obviously, I have no idea how people define sexual attraction, having never experienced anything of the sort. If you guys are attracted to other things then by all means, it includes that too.

[Cavernio]

Re: Relationship Poll

Probably less than 10 men I've been sexually aroused by merely their physical appearance.
I am NOT asexual.

[DarkManticoreX2]

Re: Relationship Poll

Ok well by that definition I'm asexual because physical features generally aren't what turn me on. But there's no freakin way in hell I'm identifying as asexual.

Cavernio: Sexually Asexual or Asexusally Sexual?????

[Mollocephalus]

Re: Relationship Poll

I'd find it nearly impossible to believe they actually love me if they can't even hug me or cuddle or sleep next to me, let alone kiss or have sex.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with two people in love being intimate. If someone isn't interested in being intimate then they probably don't love you or aren't capable of loving you.

Also real asexuality is probably closer to the rarity of SEPA patients. I doubt I'd believe anyone who claimed to be asexual.

I've done some actual research on asexuality. Although some of it is legitimate, and while i absolutely don't have any issue about someone feeling they aren't very sex driven, i still think it's for the most part a cover up for other issues or even, in some cases, a full fledged personality disorder.

That's why i mostly have to agree to the above.

[Izzy]

Re: Relationship Poll

Asexuality is a legitimate medical (physical?) phenomenon, not a way of life.

[dAnceguy117]

Re: Relationship Poll

Asexuality is a legitimate medical phenomenon, not a way of life.

I don't think "medical" is the right word here, but this is otherwise accurate

[Izzy]

Re: Relationship Poll

Maybe you are right. Not sure how else to describe it. Physical maybe.

Edit: physiological*

[tosh]

Re: Relationship Poll

For me, it would depend on if hugs and what not are off limits. If that's the case then idk if I could do it. No intercourse or foreplay would be fine by me, but that's because I've never been interested in them. Though I can definitely see how that would be distressing for a majority of people.

I guess another spinoff would be if there was a situation where your partner was incapable of being intimate beyond kisses/hugs - such as having to live the rest of their life in a hospital bed. Would the lack of intimacy cause a rift in the relationship? If it was deemed perfectly okay by society (and your partner) for you two to separate, would you?

Asexuality is a legitimate medical (physical?) phenomenon, not a way of life.

And any asexual person would agree that it's not a way of life. Their life doesn't revolve around their asexuality just as someone who is gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, whatever else sexual doesn't let their orientation define the way they live.

I've done some actual research on asexuality. Although some of it is legitimate, and while i absolutely don't have any issue about someone feeling they aren't very sex driven, i still think it's for the most part a cover up for other issues or even, in some cases, a full fledged personality disorder.

That's why i mostly have to agree to the above.

I agree that there definitely could be some other issues that are playing a part as to why some people don't feel any sexual attraction, but for the most part I'll just believe someone if they say it's their orientation. If there are other issues, then it's very possible that the person is aware of them. Whether they choose to treat those issues is their prerogative.

However, I feel that there has been too little research done on the topic to decisively say what percentage of those who identify as asexual are due to psychological issues and what percentage are due to it just being their orientation.

[Litodude]

Re: Relationship Poll

i may be going off on a limb here

watch out now


i think,


the semantic definition of 'intimate relationship'

cannot be established if there is a lack of intimacy...




i can't be entirely certain though i need an expert

[Litodude]

Re: Relationship Poll

BABY I'M GOING TO THINK ABOUT LOVING YOU SO HARD yes

[Litodude]

Re: Relationship Poll

this reminds me of that episode on sex n the city where miranda(?) goes to do yoga and wants to bang the instructor but the guy is like 'naaah spirituality and delayed gratification and shit' to the point where she can't take it and bangs a random dude from the class


u all should be more like miranda(?)

[Toxophilis]

Re: Relationship Poll

BABY I'M GOING TO THINK ABOUT LOVING YOU SO HARD yes

babe im gonna..... touch... ur butt. hold on it's gonna be a wild ride

[Litodude]

Re: Relationship Poll

if (butt == squats)
{
touch =1
}
else
{
touch =fukno
}

[TheSaxRunner05]

Re: Relationship Poll

The trouble is when there's a complete mismatch in the wants/(needs?) of the two individuals.