Poll: Would you date an asexual person?

[MrHero17]

I'm a randy and perverted teenager so no, at least not in the foreseeable future

 

[DanielBrown]

No way. Sex in a huge part of a relationship, at least for me. I can't see one working without it.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

Noooooooo. I kinda like the whole sex thing.

 

[Eldarion]

since, being pansexual, I can be with anyone and everyone.

Can you explain how that is different from being bisexual?

Sure thing.

Bisexuality means that you can be attracted to and can be with a male or a female.

Pansexuality means that you can be attracted to and can be with a male, a female, a transgender person, a hermaphrodite and whatever else there might be that I don't know the name of.

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according to the wiki article, I'm transgendered because I believe that male-female gender roles imposed by society are outdated and need to go.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.

 

[sumanoskae]

Probably not. I'm a big supporter of FWB, but I do think that sex is an important part of an emotional, romantic relationship.

When sex is just about desire, fine, but it can be about connection as well. So for me, a VERY sexually driven person, not being to physically express my feelings for my significant other would probably be emotionally painful.

Not to mention that it would basically mean no sex whatsoever(Unless she wasn't expecting monogamy, which would fix one problem but not all of them, and open up another can of worms), which would result in the temptation to be disloyal.

 

[LightspeedJack]

tl;dr (most of it)

So you can honestly tell me you've never looked at a person and thought "I'd tap that"?

 

[Nimcha]

I always feel a little bad for asexual people. They're missing out on so much.

On the other hand they don't know what they miss so I suppose it's not that bad.

 

[blaize2010]

does the fact that i may not have sex with a girl mean i don't love her? you can love someone without all that, and i've been doing just that for years. but then i hear the slutty chick in class talk about all the sex she has with her boyfriend, and they break up two days later, she's heartbroken, and he moves on an hour later. sex is not love, love is not sex. the two are often confused by people who think with their dick and shit with their mouth -_-

 

[William Ossiss]

already am. i love my girlfriend. sex isnt a big part of my life, so no worries.

 

[Sejs Cube]

Generally speaking? No. Now that said I'd be willing to entertain the idea, very much depending on the person, but that's a pretty big hurdle to get past. It's also kind of a selfish hurdle on the part of the asexual person. "Well I'm asexual and we're in a relationship, so that means you have to be asexual too. Deal with it." ...C'mon. Seems pretty unfair.

I do find the division between heter/homo-romantic and *-sexual interesting. First I've heard of that split. So where exactly does the line come down? I'm attracted to X people, but said attraction stops at a certain point? I admit I do not quite understand.

 

[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.