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
As a matter of fact I can! That meaning of "any more" is two words.
I'm not "sure that people who don't have sexual desire are damaged." But it is by far more common than simply loosing interest in sex for no medical reason. Our culture conditions us to have severely fucked-up emotions regarding sex.
I actually do think that "gay can be prayed away." There are plenty of homosexuals in denial due to their religious brainwashing. However, as an atheist, I don't think this is a good thing.
As for general tastes, one could just keep slicing that onion until it disintegrates; I'll just say that Mr Savage has more foundation than most of us to make pronouncements, though I agree there are limitations to the I Defer to the Mailbag approach.
Had you chosen to present as the Target of Thong-Wearing Straight Men Everywhere (or at least closer to that target than Mr Savage is), it would have been all Holmes-Sun-Earth to me. Unqualified statements such as your original post tend to lead me into inferring a belief in standing. This sort of hints at a tension that will have to be resolved before any true OSF/GM alliance can be forged, and I don't see that happening any time soon, as there is far too much encroachment from both sides.
I used to worry about my wife's orgasm, as I noticed she does the closed -eyes thing. Then I read Lady Chatterly's Lover and realized that the key thing with a woman was that she desired to share her intimacy with her man. IMHO, men should forget any preconceived ideas about a "correct" female orgasm and simply be grateful that he has a woman who is orgasmic. In my decades on this planet I have met numerous women who do not know what an orgasm is ...and many were married with children and hubbies etc.
Re WHAT
I love to fantasize about cross-dressing but when I brought this topic up in a hypothetical discussion with my wife:..well the revulsion was pretty powerful, much like WHAT.
I eventually followed my urge to experiment with this, & I decided NOT to do it with her. Instead, I went to fetlife and found a pro-dome. Money well spent, experiment was successful, wifey still happy. WHAT should be grateful her man feels safe enough to reveal his kink to her and be a little less judge-ey.
I have a couple other experiments on my list and will explore very carefully.
I hope Dan realizes that not everyone takes him with a grain of salt. Some think that he knows THE TRUTH about sex and sexiness and pay close attention.
“I'm confused re cross dressing. Are people suggesting, that for some men who fully crossdress, the female identity starts to take over? And over time a percentage will seek to transition?”
Again, there are lots of shades. Identity is one thing regardless of other procedures.
I know people who went all the way, hormones and genitals reassignment, to nothing but still-fairly-hairy part-time wanna-be’s like myself who are not likely to go through any modifications other than maybe hair removal here and there.
Based on what I’ve seen around where I reside I’m likely to be part of the majority.
Yup. That is what a lot of asexuals are looking for. It's also the bond in many sexless marriages. Also, not all sexless marriages are unhappy. Just as there are many many many highly sexual marriages that are miserable.
Once again I think this group of people are far less inclined to understand low-no sex drives. We are more interested in sex than average, hence our persistent presence here. We have a circle jerk going on. Pun intended.
This woman is not telling herself her truth.
Though, I know not of this inside orgasm, mine only originate from outside.
Hence the tricky part.
No wonder you took your story into your own hands. See. Another artist who could pull women. Weedy little man, with TB.
So true. Human desire goes thru so much control and interference, it's a wonder any of us can keep hold of it.
If you're looking for romance with no sex...well, I'd hope the Platonic section of (whichever) personals would give you that. Sucks that it doesn't. I believe this woman must start (if she hasn't already) to explicitly put 'asexual' in her bio. She can make up a story, if she has to; "...and then in a freak dirigible accident, I lost both my vagina and the brain lobe that produces sexual desire..." or just, bang flat out say, 'sex is off the table.'
I feel bad for her situation, not necessarily the asexual part as, like a few commenters here have noted, some people are able to channel that energy into vastly satisfying, for them, avenues, but it does look like she'll have a bit of a slog to find that one asexual guy.
It was mini torture. So the sense of humour that comes out of it, has a particular flavour.
Lava covered the Lady Chatterly’s stuff, I’ll dive into the panties drawer…
Is your wife aware of what’s going on? And is she approving?
If the answer is “no” then you should find a way to inform her for the sake of your marriage.
The other thing is the self-shaming that is some times associated with crossdressing. Some others’ first experiences have been with a “Mistress” of some sort due to this feeling, and the often wrong perception that there are no other ways to express your femininity in some accommodating, acceptable ways.
This woman is 51 not 21.
Interesting way to write it CatB; the personal add; she mAy not want sex, but she'll have you laughing.
I'll make a joke that anyone who takes Mr Savage on Fashion seriously ought to be forced to follow his dictates. But to be fair to Mr S, we don't know what people tell him in the privacy of their letters, and his good intentions towards those not trying to attract his demographic are clearly established. I'd be extremely reluctant ever to advise anyone of the OS persuasion on fashion, feeling only too sure I'd be blamed if something didn't work.
Some of the letters, from young people are pretty obviously from young people. Learning the ropes.
LW1; she's a mature woman, she knows what's what. Lamenting she can't find a close friendship/ romantic type energy maybe, with a male, without sex? She's howling at the moon.
And there would be men out there, who for one reason or another have thrown the towel in.
I know asexual men. This may not be easy to find but not impossible. It's certainly easier to find than the woman who had the vore fantasy. And wow! was she believed and respected!
This is icky in its sexism that there are no asexual men.
Of course, I forgot all men are sex fiend animals and she needs to force her self into sexuality she doesn't feel. /s
If she's getting lots or responses from sexually active men, then I'm guessing she's not being very clear in saying what she's looking for. Or what she tells herself, she's looking for.
And why isn't she being clear? Because she really hasn't said goodbye to sex..
(Also, apparently Dan has never done any stretching in his life.)
So therefore she secretly still wants the D?
I'm not saying she has to find a man; just don't abandon her sexual energy, unless she's really really sure she's done with it. A lot of life left, without that vital life force.
There's lots of ways to maintain one's sexual energy, without taking on a full intimacy.
All conjecture on my part.
As for this other point that Dan has more info to determine dating trends, I'd say the info that he has may not accurately represent the trends of people in all relationships, only those who have problematic sex lives. Also I think that dating trends are only useful in searching for someone or advertising yourself, they are not useful to a specific relationship's problems. But I'm unwilling to go further down that line of debate it's a large topic.
How is asexual incorrect? How do all of these people who claim to be sexually progressive have such a negative attitude towards a valid sexual orientation?
"Rather than really process that pain, she's closed down her sex."
I'm just not sure what you are basing this on.
"...just don't abandon her sexual energy, unless she's really really sure she's done with it."
But she has said, clearly, very clearly, that she is done with it. She says word for word that she's done with it:
"That part of my life—the sex part—is really and truly over! I had many sex partners for many years, I had a good run, and now I'm done."
I really think that it's harder for people like us, highly sexual people, people who love sex so much we talk about it to strangers online several times a week, to imagine a person who is sexless or asexual, or even low sex drives. We are all so open to every other kind of sexual desire, kink, orientation, gender blend, partner number. But this woman, this grown ass woman is clearly saying she doesn't want sex partners anymore and so many of you are INSISTING that there is more. That she is dumb, or childish, or in pain, or lying to herself.
I get it. I LOVE sex. I have lots of it. I've been amazingly married for 16 years and our sex life is amazing. But I get it. She wants all the other stuff. My marriage is awesome and if you took out sex it would still be awesome. We talk until 3am still. We never run out of things to say. We find each other fascinating. We adore each other and there is no one we'd rather spend time with. We wish we could live in each others brains sometimes. Sometimes our best love making is conversing about an album we both love. It's intense. All of that is possible without bumping uglies.
To me that's almost the same- almost- as saying, I've eatent some great food, for many years, now I'm just happy
To eat Vegemite on toast .. Well she wouldn't say that, because she's not Australian.
Sexual energy is not something to be done with, in my opinion. Like suddenly, one has had one's quota.
Well yeah. I am suggesting she is dumb, or she wouldn't be attracting men who want to get in her pants.
Her profile( seriously, on Craigslist?), should be so clear, no man who wants sex would go anywhere near her.
Yet, she doesn't sound dumb.
Either, she wants a man around whose sexual energy may still be bubbling thru him, yet, she doesn't want to feed it.
Or; she write her profile, on the asexual date site, Not Craigslist, and be real clear in her wording.
Sex is off the table/ as CatB suggested.
And it ain't gonna be on the floor either/ just to deter the smart arses.
And if there isn't an asexual dating site; then why isn't there one?
Btw, I was talking to an asexual acquaintance about this because I wanted his POV. It's similar to those people who think lesbians just haven't had the right dick, at least that is how he feels. You aren't "allowed" to claim asexuality until you've had the right number of relationships and sexual experiences and partners to satisfy the listener.
I've given him a link to this thread. I'm hoping he'll jump in. He's not much of a internet chatter though.
So maybe I relate to her in that.
She IS looking at listing for platonic relationships and what does she end up with? Dudes who don't want a platonic relationship. How is that HER fault? Her online dating search could be better, but I think that is what Dan should have focused on more.
Hi, nice to meet you, and thanks for pointing this one out:
“I really think that it's harder for people like us, highly sexual people, people who love sex so much we talk about it to strangers online several times a week, to imagine a person who is sexless or asexual, or even low sex drives.”
Question… Your avatar or whatever they call it nowadays is that of a male peacock
http://www.google.com/search?client=safa…
not a female
http://www.google.com/search?q=female+pe…
Was this intentional, and if so why? Just wondering, absolutely nothing wrong,I also tend to follow colorful silky possibilities.
In biology, an asexual organism is one who reproduces without sexual organs. Low libido is not my first thought when I hear of an asexual human. I'm sure that as I hear the label used more it'll sound less weird, more like a synonym for low libido celibacy. I also have a similar problem to the asexual orientation as I do to the "mono poly" orientation. What is an asexual relationship, besides friendship? What is "mono poly", besides casually dating? One orientation wants a close partner without sex, the other wants sex without a trusting partner. Regular good sex and romantic commitment seem more entwined than these orientations allow. I suppose we'll see how they evolve. Your second question involves your own judgement call. I assume it was rhetorical.
Orientation? It is no sexual
Orientation, isn't it?
Nobody nowhere stirs their loins.
I don't assume anything about asexuals take on their own stories. Their business.
Background info, that why she told Dan her relationship ended 9 yrs ago? To me, that's a bit of a stretch. It's of no use in the context of her looking for platonic friendships etc.
And I reiterate. Craigslist? Not the place. So already, where she's looking, has got me suspicious of her true wishes.
Craigslist is notorious for casual sex seekers. Maybe she'd have better luck placing a friends-only ad on OKCupid. Looking for no lust in all the wrong places (but if she did "secretly" want sex, she wouldn't be in the "platonic" section).
And Allen still doesn't get the difference between people whose aversion to, or inability to enjoy, sex is causing them distress and people whose only distress comes from people constantly saying there's something wrong with them.
@147: Is asexuality an orientation? Is white a colour? Is white an absence of colour?
What I'm seeing here is people treating asexuals -- whom they don't understand -- with the same level of ignorance and condescension that I've suffered as a bisexual. Please, people. You don't have to understand why some people aren't into sex, just give them the respect they deserve. This feels like a child-free woman being jumped on and told "Oh, you'll change your mind" and all the other crap we get. Some people just don't want kids. Some people just don't want sex. Why is that so difficult to accept?
'Asexual' (regardless of how it's used in biology) is a word humans who have no interest in sexual relationships have adopted. It's so less complicated than its being made out to be.
If you look at the last part of 139 I describe what a great relationship can be without sex. If you took sex out of my marriage it would still be a deeply intimate relationship. It would still be well beyond friendship.
Earlier in our marriage, I used to feel "safe" with anything said or done between us. But then it was revealed that she would share some of these ah, "creative" intimate topics that I put forth with her gal pals at work. Now I feel like I really cannot suggest anything edgy without worrying that it would be fodder for some humorous lunchtime sharing. This lack of trust is a problem.
If NNFS does mean "a romantic relationship without sex" when she says "I'm looking for platonic friendships, but only men need apply" that would explain much of her letter: first, why she's specifically looking for relationships with men, second, why she's reduced to looking on Craigslist, and third, why ALL the men eventually end up wanting sex. (Note that she's the common element across all of the incidents.) A romantic relationship without sex is not at all the same thing as a platonic friendship.
And a man who thought he was being offered a platonic friendship but discovers that what's actually being offered is a romantic relationship without sex is in my view fully entitled to renegotiate the relationship, including saying it will have to be sexual if it's to have a future, without having been insincere in his earlier offer of a platonic friendship.
If NNFS really wants platonic friendships then I suggest (1) she include women as potential platonic friends, (2) she listen to the advice that Dan gives to 16-year-old youth on making themselves more interesting (being interesting helps increase the chance of platonic friendships, not just romantic ones), and (3) she stop looking on Craigslist.
sb53 @155
The lunch sharing thing is terrible and a clear breach of trust, not that going to a "Professional Mistress" behind the wife's back is much better. I'm afraid your marriage is doomed or is likely to remain in a miserable state for a loooong time unless you tackle the issues head on. It may lead to separation, but this could also result with all involved being happier in the long run.
It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood. Anybody for a bike ride along the lake?
Depends how you read it.
You really think you'd have the same relationship if sex didn't happen between you two? I don't.
If being asexual is an orientation, it is towards who/ what? Makes no sense to me to call it an orientation.
I don't think it is disrespectful to ask questions. I don't have a problem with someone identifying as asexual. What difference should it make to me? or to anyone else for that matter. If she mentioned in her letter that sex was something she did out of obligation her whole life...and now she is finally freeing herself from that... that would be one thing... but that ISN'T what she said. She said she had lots of sexual partners and a "good run". She also states that she is still connected to her last partner (i am simplifying). So... why are some of you getting defensive on behalf of asexuals everywhere? or comparing this to the plight of a bisexual? The LW gives us a timeline. She gives information. That information makes me ask "what happened around that time? early menopause? a cheating pos partner?". I fail to see how that is presumptuous or offensive or a reach.
In my experience... when someone identifies a certain way (gay, straight, bi, asexual)... its something they have known on some deep level for most of their lives. It isn't the same thing as vegetarian ffs. THAT is more offensive to me. I think Philo is more accurate in saying celibate. OR its more honest to say "i no longer have sexual desire". But that isn't the same thing as being asexual. I wish someone who was a lifelong asexual would chime in here... to agree with me (or tell me i am nuts...lol)
Go forth and do not multiply.
And where would that leave Dan? Up the creek without a paddle.
Dan? Any comments?
Was that Dan would be up the creek, without a column.
Agree with you Chairman, nice post Old Crow @156.
That's why people write in, Yes? No?
To get responses, not just from Dan, from whomever comments on his thread.
I think Old Crow's advice is the best if we take the LW's letter and request for advice completely literally. She should state her desire more clearly. "I want a romantic relationship with no sex". (though even that begs the questions: with cuddling? no cuddling? with kissing? etc....)
And Fan, there is no such thing as knowing oneself, cause their is no self, no solid inherently existing self.
Only this construct of our ego, necessary to maintain relations with reality, leads us to believe
some " self" exists.
We are changing, all the time- if we let ourselves. If we don't hold to some rigid self definition, don't let the ego call all the shots.
Admittedly, I don't know to what extent this is true, or if it's just guys complaining because they don't have as much sex as they want, but I know that this was the deciding factor in at least a few divorces/separations among my acquaintances.
Now everybody, in the immortal words of Tom Robinson, sing if you're glad to be gay.
>>What is "mono poly", besides casually dating? One orientation wants a close partner without sex, the other wants sex without a trusting partner.>>
I've heard of "solo poly," but those people do want intimacy & trust. They just don't want to live with their partners.
When people just want casual sex, usually they say that, in my experience.
The plot builds on points and characters from previous episodes. and it turns out that one of the characters that figures prominently, who we figured was bad, turns out to have been a literal Avenging Angel (what the title is listing), even though those terms were never used, lots of understated points as was common with that show. . I watched this episode in the 90’s when it first aired, with my gf of the time, who was both highly intelligent and steeped in Catholic lore.
It is difficult to communicate how great it was to watch that with someone who you knew got it at the same time you did, who was on the same wavelength, and who didn’t need plot points that you (whoever you were) got, laid out with a shovel.
I get what PennyLady says about her current relationship, and the simpatico that the two of them enjoy. Watching that show with someone someone who would after be all like, “...so, who, like, was that guy? And did he shoot that other guy? And for what?” I mean, I like a small waist and big round ass, but they don’t make an ass that good. Or they do, but some smart girls got ‘em too.
That said, I’m still, like a lot of posters here, a bit in the dark as to what the LW wants from a relationship. If it’s a romantic relationship that doesn’t include sex, she needs to lay out the ‘asexual’ part in bold. As someone commented long ago on SL, subtlety doesn’t work but so good on guys in relationships, especially in personal ads. This will cut down on her available field, but will save tsuris in future.
No kidding, that really was a badass episode. Some of the last lines still get me all fucked up. I sometimes watch it when I lose one of the kitties. Worth checking out.
I still don't know what makes a best friend different from an asexual's romantic relationship. Friendship can be as intimate as family. But I don't want to be called condescending and ignorant because I'm not up on the latest ideas from tumblr or twitter. The asexuality label is new, of course people are going to lack knowledge about it.
@183/186: I identify as solo poly and believe me, it is very different from "sex but not commitment." That's casual sex. In solo poly, there is commitment, just not a we're-eventually-going-to-move-in-together-and-have-kids-and-stop-shagging-other-people commitment. There is commitment to an ongoing, if not full-time, relationship, with honesty and I-love-yous and going on holidays together and occasionally *gasp!* NOT having sex when you spend the night together. There is just not commitment to telling them everywhere you'll be 24/7, veto power over other partners, an assumption that the relationship will become more entwined with time. When I make weekend plans, I make weekend plans, I don't check with my partner(s) first. Solo poly is relationships + independence, not interdependence. That's the best way I can draw the distinction.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/busine…
"'Viagra For Women' Gets Push for F.D.A. Approval"
I do think there's a difference between asexuality which I think of as never having an interest in partnered sex, celibacy which I think of as an interest in partnered sex which one has consciously chosen not to act on for a variety of reasons, and what NNFS describes which seems to be diminished to nothing interest in sex which one may or may not be okay with. I also think the reasons for the lack of interest matter. It could be inborn, a response to abuse, something medical, or not having found the right partner.
If you're fantasizing about someone else during sex, I would think the relationship's days are numbered.
I get that just fine. What you don't get is that some people's lack of interest in sex is due to their never having truly enjoyed it because they never got over all the negative emotions they were raised to feel about sex.
A lack of distress at a state doesn't mean it isn't a problem. If someone's only ever had crappy chain store pizza, and they decide they aren't interested in having pizza anymore, they also won't be distressed. However, they'd probably enjoy life more after being dragged to an independent, family-owned Italian restaurant by a friend who saw the mistake they were making.
Is it? I'm glad someone thinks so.
My impression is that it's not uncommon for women to share intimate secrets about their partners with their friends. I was told point blank by one girlfriend that what she said about me to her friends (including my kinks) is "none of your business." Made hanging out with her friends awkward.
I love how you articulated this, may be time to redefine my own definitions:
"In solo poly, there is commitment, just not a we're-eventually-going-to-move-in-together-and-have-kids-and-stop-shagging-other-people commitment. There is commitment to an ongoing, if not full-time, relationship, with honesty and I-love-yous and going on holidays together and occasionally *gasp!* NOT having sex when you spend the night together. There is just not commitment to telling them everywhere you'll be 24/7, veto power over other partners, an assumption that the relationship will become more entwined with time"
No sex after having had the desired amount of kids ? That's no way to live ! I totally understand why that would result in a divorce... I didn't mean that. Japanese people seem to have a healthier attitude towards sex than judeo-christiano-muslims, I know that abortion is not a hot topic there - though depictions of vulvas are deemed obscene, unlike depiction of penises.
Anyway, I heard that about some Japanese women having reached their 50s, so a while after menopause, not as a still ovulating woman trying not to conceive anymore. I suspect the then abstinent wives among them give license to their husbands to see someone on the side, as long as it's discreet.
"If one realizes that one is being asked to concede the original point, one should refuse to do so, even if the point being asked is a reputable belief. On the other hand, if one fails to realize that one has conceded the point at issue and the questioner uses the concession to produce the apparent refutation, then one should turn the tables on the sophistical opponent by oneself pointing out the fallacy committed"
There ya go everyone.... Go forth and win the argument. :) you're welcome
It may be cultural and/or age thing. I don't have much personal experience with women I'm dating telling their girlfriends what we do and what I'm up to. My ex was pretty uptight regarding mentioning anything at all about our sex life to others. The women I'm meeting nowadays may do so, at least one of them did tell her girlfriend about our encounter, but it didn't really bother me.
Maybe some female readers can tell us more. My experience with guys is that while sex stuff may come up in a conversation, when one mentioning a lover it is almost always an anonymous past one rather than the woman he is with right now. And those conversations certainly don't happen on an on-going basis.
I don't think that's what happened here. I think that her sexuality might have just been fluid and this is where it has landed currently.
I'm somewhere in the pan/bi arena, I don't really know for sure and it's irrelevant to me because I'm monogamous and happily married. But there have been times in my life where I prefer dick and times when I prefer boobs and times when I would have loved to have found someone with both. (It's odd I ended up with a really straight, bearded, beefy guy...you never know!)
So maybe she's somewhere between the "likes dick" and "likes nothing but myself" spectrum and this is where she's landed.
You see people who have "faked" or "dealt with" straight relationships for their whole lives only to finally come to terms with being gay, or being bi and decided it's time to have same sex relationships.
I still believe people who are on the very straight and on the very gay ends of the spectrum don't get people who are remotely in the middle. Super gay and Super straight people have more in common with each other than those of us who float around between. I think she's just on a straight-asexual tangent and she's happy there.
Is the Pope a Catholic...
Yes we do. Not necessarily re sex,at least not for me, unless maybe it's at the beginning stages of a relationship.
Women talk with each other about their feelings. About their work. About their kids. About their parents and politics etc.
They talk with each other about their lives.
Not necessarily their sex lives in detail, unless they have an issue with it.
Women work thru their lives together, in my experience.
If there is an emotional/ family issue going on, women share it, untill some resolution is achieved, some movement, or just acceptance that this is a long haul issue.
When my marriage broke down, my girlfriends could get many texts a day from me, moaning etc .. They worked thru each stage of grief with me, they helped me move on. They loved me.
Think we can say, round the topics this week, we have different opinions.
My comment was not criticizing the trusting bond that women may form with each other.
It was the part that supposedly includes discussing their partner's sex fantasies and kinks, based on what those trusting partners may have told them.
Say a man brings into his relationship that he has a certain wish/ kink.
If the woman is scared/ reticent, she may talk it over with her very very trusted girlfriend, and this dialogue might help the partner to explore this kink.
So context and motivation are important here.
I do regard loyalty as incredibly important in a relationship though, I don't know if that makes me unusual. One of my friends recently told my husband that he's so lucky because I never say a bad word about him. Of course if the relationship fell apart I guess I'd have a fair bit to say.
I've said before, that my experience is that the people I know who talk most about their sex lives are the people with really crap sex lives. I just keep my own counsel and enjoy the sex.
I do remember an early episode of Weeds where a character said the guys still having sex with their wives don't talk about it in case they jinx it!
You're right, for some this may have nothing to do with lack of attraction to their partner. For others... In a serious relationship, my preference is to be able to talk openly about fantasies with the goals of getting comfortable with them, addressing the inevitable insecurities and misunderstandings, and learning how to be a good participant. I say this as someone who has mostly been on the disclosing side of those conversations. I haven't had many curve-balls thrown at me.