Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
You're asexual? Fine.....however you have no business dating me. I don't want to date you and I'm fairly certain most other sexual people don't want to date you either.
Does that mean I couldn't have a valued and intimate friendship with you? Absolutely not. However, it is a relationship that will lack a basic desire in someone that I wish to be "in love" with. Remember there one can still be "ggg" and still have their boundaries of "a fetish too far." For most sexual people, foregoing physical intimacy in partner relationship is "a fetish to far" and as such they have every right to know that before getting in too deep and they have every right to reject you for it. You have to accept that. We're not bigots, we just like to fuck.
Life is too short, don't go wasting people's time.
Well, that's a start.....
Who gives a damn? "Orientation" is just a word. The key point to remember is that asexual people are human beings, with feelings that you shouldn't stomp on.
"Asexuals can go not fuck themselves..."
I trust this was just a clever joke, with no malice intended.
"A relationship without sex is a friendship"
Really? What if we're talking about a married couple?
"Maybe that's the problem for these folks..."
No, see, there's no problem if you just treat them like human beings and respect their absence of sex drive. There's nothing "missing," they are not sick or broken. They're people, and people inhabit a wide spectrum of sexual response.
For the record, I am not asexual. I am gay, which might help me analogize from my own experience of being treated as somehow "different" when I feel like I'm pretty much the same as everyone else. There has been some empathy fail on this thread.
Only bigots like to fuck....
I wish I would have found this out before we got married. He can ramp it up during courtship but after being married, it all went to hell. He is a wonderful man and I dearly love him but miss being sexual.
So you can't dump an asexual? If you're gay, you should made to date straights even if they don't want to have sex with you?
Of course you can break up with someone if they tell you they don't like sex, and you're looking for someone who does. What some of us are objecting to is that asexuals are being discussed as if they were freaks.
damn iPhone spell check.
OK, see, this is where we're butting heads. If there is no sexual attraction to begin with, then it can't be about sexual attraction. It can't be about a negative. Or, a better way to put it is that it's about the lack of sexual attraction to other people. "Orientation" is all about attraction to other people.
Man, I know it's lame to pull out the old Webster's, but I think that defining our terms would be a big help: Orientation: a usually general or lasting direction of thought, inclination, or interest.
See how the definition is active? positive? Asexuality is the lack of all these. Not negative! Not lacking! Just the lack of an inclination (sex) or interest (sex) or direction of thought (about sex). Asexuality seems to be the opposite of a sexual orientation.
Romantic attraction, which I very much believe most asexuals experience, is not an orientation; it's an emotion. It's not physical (like sexual orientation); it's spiritual. Two completely different things.
I'm loathe to postulate here, but if forced, I'd bet my paycheck that--just like the rest of the population--asexuals who form long-term romantic attractions do so only with the opposite sex. I'd bet that 3-5% of asexuals form romantic attractions to those of the same sex. I'd bet that a small, annoying number go both ways (and gripe when they feel neglected)*. This is all conjecture, but I'd bet my paycheck on it.
*I'm joking around. I'm not exactly straight myself, and I kind of enjoy Dan's jokes about bisexuals. Mostly.
I'm loathe to postulate here, but if forced, I'd bet my paycheck that--just like the rest of the population--the vast majority of asexuals who form long-term romantic attractions do so only with the opposite sex.
Sorry about that, clicked send instead of edit.
But see, that's not the definition of what sexual orientation is.
This I understand. I've never thought about it, but, yes, sexual attraction (whether gay or straight) is simply assumed, so I do have empathy for what asexuals must experience in this society. It's pretty fucking frightening to go through puberty and then the young adult years knowing that we're different, but not being able to articulate it.
I hope that you understand that my argument with how asexuality should be defined and categorized in no way means that I consider it a deviancy or "less than." I hope I've not come across that way, but if I have, please know that I didn't mean to.
As far as your earlier point goes, homosexuality is an orientation and as I understand it homosexuality is not only about being sexually attracted to the same sex but also includes not being sexually attracted to the opposite sex. Similarly a part of the definition of heterosexuality is not being sexually attracted to the same sex. (That's why bisexuals don't consider themselves either heterosexual or homosexual.) So the definition of an orientation *can* include negative parts. Well asexuality is just the same way - except it's negative with respect to both same and opposite sex attractions.
I think the orientation is just the list of attractions. There are obviously four possibilities given two sexes to simplify things: YY,YN, NY and NN.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopi…
http://tinyurl.com/dfjvj9
Well venting would be a good start...
"you are now finding out about asexuality"
You're right, I've never bedded a frigid babe....either that or I was able to remove the stick out of their asses for one night.
So no parade? No fancy costumes and demands for equal rights?
Your politics, apparently, are as dull as your sex lives.
Do you watch cricket too?
I see this all stemming out of Dan's comments that asexual people have a responsibility to disclose their orientation early on, by the third date. This spawned the comments that Dan was anti-asexual and a horrible person.
It's just like someone in a poly relationship. I have no interest in being a secondary, so I'd like to knwo early on if that's what someone has in mind for me so I can say "no thank you" or perhaps even change my mind. It's not treating you like a freak to put the onus of disclosure on any party for anything that might be a deal-breaker.
"Someone who is incapable of meeting a sexual's needs has no business dating a sexual in the first place."
Then he pointed and laughed at the idea of being monogamous in a nonsexual relationship. That's just not up to Dan's standard.
And was there a single post calling Dan "anti-asexual and a horrible person"? I'm not going to read over all the posts again, but as I recall there was just some disappointment - a sense that Dan ought to know better.
'I tried it, thanks. I don't like it.'
"But it's delicious."
'Go ahead and have it, then. It's not for me.'
"... but it's delicious. Why would you want to deny yourself the delicious soup?"
"I see this all stemming out of Dan's comments that asexual people have a responsibility to disclose their orientation early on"
- It all stems from this in the sense that that is what started the conversation but, quite simply, it is not what asexuals here have been objecting to.
"It's just like someone in a poly relationship. I have no interest in being a secondary, so I'd like to knwo early on..."
- Yes I know, and we've already been through this. As far as I can see everyone here is agreed that asexuals who properly understand their asexuality should disclose it early on. You don't need to keep arguing this.
I'm just guessing here, but I don't think that "being monogamous in a nonsexual relationship" is up to the standard of most sexual people. Sexual people want to have sex. And it's not hard to see how a sexual person would be unhappy in a relationship with a person who wasn't interested in sex and wasn't interested in allowing their partner to get their needs fulfilled elsewhere.
I have no problem with the existence of Asexuality. I don't doubt that there are people who have no chemical, biological or psychological problems and just aren't into sex. But I think that those people should be open about it and disclose early. I say this as someone who is poly. If I'm interested in dating someone, I make it clear early on that I am married and my relationship with my wife is Primary. Clear communication is step #1 in any relationship.
I don't think there is any information on long term asexual relationships but the romantic orientation of aseuxals has been discussed on AVEN. There have been two polls, the results of which have been summarized below.
Hetero-romantic 35% / 42%
Homo-romantic 7% / 11%
Bi-Romantic 16% / 24%
A-Romantic 20% / 15%
Pan-Romantic 14%
Other 7% / 8%
http://www.asexuality.org/en/index.php?s…
What's your point? I think we've already established that asexuals should openly negotiate the terms of their relationships, just like everyone should. Since there are asexual people willing to have sex purely for the benefit of their sexual partners, it seems obvious that there must be sexual people willing to forego sex for the sake of their relationship with an asexual person. Do people forget how to masturbate when they commit to a relationship?
Such relationships are perfectly valid and worthy if they work for the couple concerned. They may be unusual - even very unusual. Dan (and the Slog comment board) is not usually in the business of ridiculing unusual sexual practices.
1) Being in a relationship when you realize that you really ARE asexual, not just 'more interested in other things'.
and
2) Trying to explain this to your partner when you break it off because it isn't fair to demand they stay celibate for you. And having them insist that the two of you can 'work it out'. (no, we can't.)
On to your questions. Answers are only valid for me.
Q.Really? A. Yes. Virgin. 31. No desire.
Q. Abused? A. No.
Q. Chemical imbalance? A. Doctor says no.
Q. Do you date? A. I don't, cos I've never found someone I thought of in that way. I agree that asexuality should be disclosed promptly; I'm actually very sex-positive. I'm aware that it's normal and healthy and that I'm unusual.
Q. Do you masturbate? A. No; I don't seem to have any drive that needs releasing. I've tried it a few times, but have lost interest after a couple of minutes. I do occasionally enjoy reading erotic stories. I like to imagine, but in my case it doesn't lead to anything. I have no need to get off.
Q. Gay, but in denial? A. The problem with that being that I'm not attracted to women, either. I'm straight, to the extent that I give a fuck.
Q. Ugly? A. Possible--I'm not qualified to judge--but I HAVE had offers.
Does that help people? Feel free to ask away.
What, negotiate with lawyers? I prefer the '9 1/2 weeks' model...at what point should I bring in the consent forms, before or after I squirt chocolate sauce on Mrs. Smith (who, btw, performed fabulous falatio on Mr Smith last night, this after 20 yrs of marriage)?
You sound like the womyn studies majors on my college campus in the 1980s who insisted men needed to ask for permission before each and every sexual act, including foreplay:
"May I please stroke your neck...check"
"May I please suck on your nipples....check"
That would have made even Kim Bassinger frigid.
Dan is correct that a person's orientation should be revealed before anything serious starts. By the way, I'm the Philadelphia Asexual Examiner so you can certify that I am, in fact, ugly, but it's probably nothing losing a little weight wouldn't cure. Being ugly and asexual can be co-morbid conditions.
And the basic difference is asexuals never had an interest in sex. People don't become asexual through traumas or other conditions and to the idiot who suggested the Nunnery I suggest he read "Eight Myths about the Religious Life" that the Jesuits putout.
We're not demanding equal rights, because we already HAVE them. Asexuality has never been illegal. We would just like a little more slack from the rest of society, so that people don't assume that we're crazy or abused or "saving ourselves" or liars or in denial or have standards that are too high or whatever. I like my life fine, thanks.
Your politics, apparently, are as dull as your sex lives.
You obviously don't know me and how politically active I am on many other issues. But I suppose i wouldn't want to get to know a person like you either seeing as you've willingly splattered your closed-mindedness all over this page.
Try this soup, it's delicious."
'I tried it, thanks. I don't like it.'
"But it's delicious."
'Go ahead and have it, then. It's not for me.'
"... but it's delicious. Why would you want to deny yourself the delicious soup?"
Quoted for emphasis, because this is exactly what people sound like to us...
You're right, I've never bedded a frigid babe....either that or I was able to remove the stick out of their asses for one night.
So me not enjoying it means I have a stick up my ass? I am far from prude, I do have a sense of humor, but I don't find harassment humorous. I sexually pleasure my boyfriend, and because I'm not focused on myself because I'm not feeling anything from it, I make up for being quite skilled at what I do because I can focus on his reactions, so if anything you're the one missing out, buddy.
How, watching cricket together?
Hey, I met a girl in Bangkok like that once.
I guess asexuals are bigots too. Dull, sexless bigots.
@35 - "Why else would somebody forego one of life's most pleasent experiences?"
Because for them, maybe it isn't?
And to answer a popular question on here: Yes, most asexuals (but not all) masturbate. The term "Asexual" is being used to refer to the lack of being sexually attracted to people, not being without a sexuality per se. I am asexual myself. I have a sexuality, its just not turned on by the presence or thought of people (or kids, animals, etc.). Many asexuals have fetishes for instance. The term is being used to mean "Not sexually attracted to either sex".
Michaeld really says it the best I think.
I agree with Dan (and just about everyone else) in that you should discuss your sexual compatability with someone BEFORE the relationship becomes serious.
That aside, many of the comments on this thread have shown a misunderstanding of what asexuality actually is and confusion about how it is defined.
Asexuality is defined (most commonly) as someone who does not experience sexual ATTRACTION. NOT as someone who does not have sex. The lack of attraction (mostly) leads to a lack of sex, but it doesn't mean that there isn't sex. It's simply hard to enjoy sex when you're NOT ATTRACTED to the one you're having sex with. Many asexuals DO have a sex drive and DO masturbate - those things have nothing to do with attraction to other people.
As far as the question of asexuality as an orientation goes, asexuals don't really have much choice. We don't HAVE a sexual orientation, and yet society expects us to say that we do. Thus, we are forced to exert that asexuality IS an orientation lest we be unable to answer the question: "What is your sexual orientation?" The term "orientation" isn't really appropriate to describe how we are, but it's the only way for us to answer that question truthfully.
There was a time when it was common for gay people to date and have relationships with people of the opposite gender, because society was so unaccepting of their orientation that they found it difficult to accept themselves.
People who trash asexuality and make fun of asexuals are not fostering an environment where we're open and accepting enough of ourselves to be open about it with the world, which is what you say you want.
Most things in nature fall in some kind of curve. At one end there are people who need to screw anything that moves. We're at the other end. Most people happen to be somewhere in between. We're all human, and we're all sexually valid.
For many of us, it isn't until later in late that we realize we're truly different. When I was a teenager, nobody was talking about asexuality. I assumed that all the sex talk that was going on was just posturing, and that people weren't really as obsessed with sex as TV and pop culture made them out to be. I had to be out in the world for a good many years before I understand that it wasn't that much of an exaggeration.
So, more talk is the answer. Not, "wear a bell around you neck so we know to stay away from you."
Just don't get pissed when you get dumped by a humper.....and don't deny me the right to make fun of frigid women.
I'd like to see you explain to my older sister, a trans woman, how you have common oppression. You know, because she got beaten and raped in Bellingham for being trans back in 1995 (you know, before trans people had any legal rights, as opposed to the lip service laws we have now) and the media didn't give a hot shit. The reporter from the Herald was more interested in the fact that there was this rather fetching 17-year-old dame from Ferndale who OMG HAD A WEENIS. It was horrible. We had to move the hell out of Whatcom County because of it. Has this ever happened because you're asexual? I don't fucking think so.
I'd like you to explain to me about how you've been denied a job or marriage rights (both of which have happened to me because i'm a lesbian) because of your being asexual. Oh, wait, you can't. That's because the mechanics of societal oppression don't involve you at the same level. I won't doubt that it messes with some relationships, but it's just not to even one tenth the degree in one's social world.
It's not an orientation. It's a state of being. Your politics are grotesque in that you travel on the backs of our oppression, our dead homos and our dead trans people, our blood and our struggle. Build your own fucking movement, but get the hell away from us. Our losses are not yours to co-opt and use for your own gain. It's like when white people decide they're Native and then i get to hear about how your great-grandfather was a fucking Cherokee princess. (Cherokee culture didn't include princesses. In case you want to pretend to be from the tribe i'm from, the Lummi Nation, our culture does.)
Actually I've never, personally met a frigid woman...maybe I'm good at pulling the sticks out of their asses?
I'm sorry about what happened to you sister. Since you asked the question I thought I share some of my life experience.
When I was around 12, and everyone else was starting to devlop crushes, I didn't understand why people wanted to form relationships. When the other guys talked about the girls they liked I didn't get it. That's when they started calling me all the different names for gay and beating me up. When the teachers would break up the fights the other students would all say I started it. After I got suspended a few times they had me talk to the school counselor. When I told her how all of this got started she suspected sexual abuse, and filed a FINS petition and I got referred to coulencing. While they were tring to figure out my 'real' problem the situation at school continued. After a while I refused to go to either one.
That's when the courts got involve, That year and part of the next I got away with just going to school a few day before and after court. Thats when the judge got fed up and put me in foster care. My first foster home the people were great and nobody in school knew about me. Everything was going good and I was finally able to return home. Everything went back to the way it was before. My second placement was in a group home and I hated it. There was no place to to ever be alone, and I'm not a people person, so I left. Thats when I got put in a more secure therapeutic environment. I spent about 2 years being bounced between some of those places before being returned to foster care. During that time my mom had moved and when I aged out I was returned to her.
About dating...I don't date. End of story. While I have "intense friendships" that are different from my regular friendships, I don't feel that they are missing sex. Frankly, I'm not interested and don't want to deal with it. I even went onto an asexual dating site (yes, there is such a thing) for companionship, but it's really just too complicated, so I don't bother with it.
For what it's worth, i would be much less opposed to the Asexual Movement if it didn't try to butt into queer culture and demand acceptance. I know there are people who say that about gender-varying/variant/different and trans folks, but the queer movement as we know it had trans and gender-different people as part of it from the get-go, from the first glass hucked at the Stonewall Inn through Sandy Stone at Olivia Records and so on and so forth. It's apples and oranges. It's deeply disrepectful to queers for the asexual folks to latch onto us and expect to be part of our existence when your oppression is different. It's insulting to us and it's doing yourselves a disservice.
Oh yeah, and if you really want to play that game, when did you first lose your job for being asexual? When were you first raped and the cops laughed at you for it? When did you walk into a job interview and suddenly there wasn't a job available anymore? I'm not dicksizing (besides, mine's immense, i bought it at Babeland), i'm pointing out how ridiculous and insulting it is that you're even trying.
I'm I wasn't trying to start a pissing contest I was trying to show that every has struggles when they don't fit into the hetero-normative society. Anyways I believe it was the LGBT community that reached out to us and help us with our visibility efforts. I apologize if I offended you, but you did ask the question.
Actually Harriet he wasn't. You were in #153. You were trying to ridicule the idea that we have experienced any oppression worth talking about, and now that this has shown to be false you have the gall to accuse others of playing the oppression game. Yes, I've been beaten up for showing no interest in sex and therefore being assumed gay. Yes I've faced ridicule and social ostracism and, unlike if I was homosexual, for ages had no support network to turn to, as I had a sexual orientation that is widely believed not to even exist. No, I've not had it anything like as bad as many gay or trans people have, including your sister. But then again many gay and trans people have been lucky too - are they also banned from your movement?
Look, if LGBT people as a whole wanted an exclusive club for those who'd been oppressed in exactly the same way then of course we'd stay out. However the LGBT movement as I understand it is largely a POSITIVE movement designed to support EVERYONE's choice of sexual preferences, and is open to EVERYONE who supports gay and trans rights as well as others. Well if enough of you don't want non-gay and non-trans people turning up at pride parades to support LBGT rights as well as others then I guess eventually we won't, but I'm fairly sure that approach would not be beneficial for either the movement or for LGBT rights. It'd be very sad for the asexuality movement but I don't think it'd impact it too much, given that it has been largely built up from scratch thanks to the heroics of people like David Jay and others, rather than leeching off any other movement.
And no, conflating it with thinking bisexuals aren't queer enough (how fucking tired is that logic?) or that queer people who pass for not queer...not cool. Completely different lines of logic.
Hateful is taking the blood we've shed and trying to dilute it with something entirely unrelated because when in doubt, you just ram it down the throats of the queers.
And Harriet, for the record, who are you to say who can or who can't identify as queer? Has someone created an official Queer Club (and made you chairperson for life of course) while I wasn't looking?
Ya know, Harriet, I can't even believe that you're part of the LGBT. You seem to know nothing of what it stands for and share the same narrow-mindedness that the movement is fighting against. Are you just another troll trying to stir shit up, or are you really as stupid and foolish as you're coming off?
The difference between asexuality and a sexual disorder is that asexuals aren't caused distress by their lack of desire. I had a great childhood, I'm not strictly religious, and I've had plenty of healthy relationships. Still not interested.
Asexuals aren't trying to trick any sexual person into a relationship. From some of the stories people have listed here, I'd say the "asexuals" you dated, didn't know they were asexual--hence the confusion. I didn't know for the longest time and felt so guilty whenever I was in a relationship and didn't seem to be having as much fun as my partner, and I know they felt inadequate for not being able to please me. Now I don't have to put myself or anyone else in that position.
I'm open about my asexuality to friends and family. It's unlikely I'd start seeing someone without them knowing. But for those who experience embarrassment about it, I can see waiting (til the third date, rather than even before the first). What's the point of inviting all of those awkward questions (many of which have been voiced here) about your childhood and sexual history before you know whether or not you'll be compatible on an intellectual level.
As far as asexual/asexual and asexual/sexual partnerships go, every relationship is unique. Sexual arrangements vary from the asexual person having it to please the sexual person to the sexual person being allowed to seek sexual pleasure elsewhere. I assume for sexuals in a monogamous relationship that the aspects of the relationship that help you decide to be faithful to one aren't exclusively sex-related. All of those aspects still exist. Personally, I like cuddling, kissing, hugging, and holding hands--all things I pick and choose with whom I do them.
Visit www.asexuality.org and find out about it if you're actually interested in learning something rather than bashing.
I agree. Well there are a people who are probably "non sexual" and don't realize it but if you are aware that you have little to zero sex drive you have no business trying to run with the sex freak crowd and then whining because things didn't work out.
I have often wondered why people would identify with a sexual, not affectional, orientation. I have never been able to feel attraction to someone I wasn't deeply in love with. Of course, like most people, I would make comments about the women I fell in love with.
What those women didn't know was the intensity of the emotion I felt toward them.
For the record, I have twice the amount of testosterone that a "normal" woman has. It has "failed" to "increase" my "sex" drive, which, as just mentioned, is so connected to my emotions that it is living hell when I find out that someone who I thought really loved me just wanted a "good fuck".
One of my best friends is in jail for "first degree murder" because she was on a date and a man tried to rape her. She ended up having to kill him to defend herself. Of course, here in Central PA, she was convicted. The look on the jurors' faces was all I needed to see to know the verdict.
I have also fallen in love with a FTM transsexual who was my mirror image. The depression I fell into lasted four years, and during the first year I attempted suicide five times. And yes--my sex drive has always been indistinguishable from a deep feeling of love.
Ian, if there is karma, I would seriously worry about your precious genitalia. I wouldn't want a woman within ten miles of you. You obviously despise women as you treat them like blow-up dolls, and I would seriously worry about you "taking" what you obviously feel is "your due" if a woman didn't let you fuck her. What you have against the British is beyond me, unless you come from N. Ireland, in which case I totally understand.
Still, you may find yourself on the wrong end of a bad mess if anybody ever decides to seriously fuck you over (pun intended) due to your lack of attention and arrogance concerning sex.
You need serious help before you hurt someone. With that rage, you're a bomb waiting to go off.
Lakewolf
Q. Abused? A. No.
Q. Chemical imbalance? A. Doctor says no.
Q. Do you date? A. Yes. With girls who know I'm asexual. Most people who know me know that, so there's no question of when to 'come out' on dates.
Q. Do you masturbate? A. Rarely. Never found it very pleasant,
Q. Gay, but in denial? A. I am gay. AND asexual.
Q. Ugly? A. I'm a model. The stereotypical tall and naturally thin one with a symetrical face, clear skin and nice breasts. I could have just about anyone if I felt like it.
I guess I'm just saying that I can love and want to join souls without joining bodies. To say 'just a friendship' is a painful thing; I cannot love romantically, spiritually and fully? I am insufficient to love and be loved on a level anyone should demand of a romantic relationship? No one can justify that to me. Call me unnatural, call me repressed, call me anything like that. But don't take away my right to love people because of whether or not i have sex.
I cry to think of hatred people can feel for me when I feel love.
Nevertheless, bad sex is not better than no sex or sex with sex toys ( saying bad sex I mean sex that makes you feel sad or used or that is just physically un-pleasurable.)
I'll also state that it's definitely fair to make it clear that you are asexual if you are dating a sexual. I don't think anyone in their reasonable mind would argue otherwise.
All that having been said... I... don't understand why people have a problem with who we are? We just... don't want sex. Is that so terrible?
Oh my god you guys.
So... I'm asexual. For those that don't understand what it really is, check out AVEN at asexuality.org. Don't just scan, read until you understand.
While I am asexual, I don't see it as a true orientation. It's not like straight, gay, bi, etc. You can be straight (like I am) and be asexual. There're so many different aspects of asexuality to consider as well... like romantic and aromantic. There're a lot of grey areas. But I do think asexuality is something that exists.
Sure, I think that asexuals should disclose that they are asexual at the beginning of the relationship. But not because they're asexual... shouldn't it be that at the beginning of any relationship you and your potential partner disclose what exactly you're looking to get out of the relationship. Sexuality or Orientation shouldn't have anything to do with that cause thats a common sense thing.
& I was just thinking. As an asexual, I like people for their personalities and intellect and common interests. I'm more aromantic than romantic, but if I were to be with anyone then I would want to have a bond with them and be monogamous (if it were another asexual). If I were going to be with someone sexual I wouldn't mind if they had someone to have sex with as long as they weren't romantically attracted to them.
Lastly, I do see asexual relationships as being deeper than just friendships. For any relationship to work there has to be some romantic bond. Saying that without sex its just a friendship would be like saying all sexual relationships are basically friends with benefits. There obviously has to be a connection regardless of whether a couple has sex or not.
Still, I've never been in love or had a relationship. I'm not interested in sex and the thought of establishing a relationship by exchanging bodily fluids just sounds gross to me. Where's imagination? I understand sex as a natural component in relationship when nature and babies come in, but what about the other aspects of human interaction? I myself hope to be able to find a partner in future. Someone I can trust to, someone I can respect and honour and love. Someone I can test my limits with and share the big and little things in life. Someone I can get old with. Someone who feels the same respect towards who I am and feels safe and content sharing his/her life with me. Not all asexuals feel the need for romanticism but I do.
People who have high sex drive and who can't seem to bother to think outside of their box easily regard the lack of sex drive as something as a deformity in itself. I don't know. Maybe it's so? But personally I'm not considering my asexuality as a problem at all. To be honest I have other things to concentrate on in life and even actual problems to worry about.
The emphasize both heterosexuals and LGTB people put to sexuality and how to "do it right" amazes me. Religion, politics, evolutionary theories, talk shows, human rights... Why can't people respect the feelings of others and honour each life. I find it completely acceptable to share different views but why to create a war out of whether or not two people can share their life together? One of the reasons I feel aversion towards Christianity is that so many people who advertise themselves as Christians state they're spreading the word of God when they're actually fighting against love and mutual respect. Odd.
(Plus, still concerning on the religion part of the discussion, I also know Christians who cherish life in all of its forms. It's amazing how easy it is to give them the equal amount of respect in return.)