Jump to content
paporomantic

Sexual attraction as felt by aros

Recommended Posts

@Mark

 Might have been unclear. I meant people are usually like "let's date/try a relationship" with "hook up". So it's romance in mind, not one night stands. It's also not the majority of people who do this. It's just more prevalent with hetero guys.
 

15 hours ago, NullVector said:

Yeah, me too. I especially feel you on the "this way I'll sure as hell not ever find out". I always worked on the assumption that my summoning up the courage/recklessness/stupidity(!) to even attempt anything 'romantic' would need to be predicated on my finding the other person super-awesome from a friendship perspective first. So the idea of "romance first" made literally zero sense to me. Like, the opposite of sense, even. It took me a LONG time to figure out that most other people don't operate that way...


Yes, same here. How people go romance first even though they literally don't know jackshit about the person in question is mind boggling to me. How could someone possibly know that they'd want that person in their life without anything to base that on apart from looks and first impression? Does not compute o__o

 

Another thing I've noticed is that I really can't tell what intentions the person might have, when approaching me. Are they flirting because romance? Or do they wanna hook up? Or are they just friendly in general? So when in doubt, my aro-mind usually aborts the mission :rofl: Like "nooo, brain calculates a hazy 30-70% chance of romantic intentions do not take risks! abort! abort!"

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SoulWolf said:

Until I really thought about it hard, and started to question just what exactly is the difference between a romantic relationship and friendship... in my mind, I couldn't really come up with anything. I started asking people why they would actually want a relationship over friendship, and the answers they gave were all things that I think friendship could give them just as well.

To me romance does seem of have some commonality with friendship. Like a degraded multi-generational copy with strange additions.
With those additions such as exclusivity, escalation and merger weakening any similarity to friendship.

4 hours ago, Kojote said:

How people go romance first even though they literally don't know jackshit about the person in question is mind boggling to me. How could someone possibly know that they'd want that person in their life without anything to base that on apart from looks and first impression? Does not compute o__o

Maybe it's because romantic relationships can be quite standardised. So individuals matter less than being able to follow the script. Certainly the aim of the whole thing appears to be to merge into a couple...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2017 at 11:05 PM, NullVector said:

I have plenty of non-awkward relationships with women (female friends and family members, for example). And of course I can rationally accept the notions that women are just people, that there is nothing really to be scared of about interacting with them and that my happiness shouldn't depend upon their reactions to me. But then I do find that the presence of strong sexual attraction can mess with my ability to behave like a rational human being in general xD I think that only makes it awkward for me initially though. Once I've had a few conversations with somebody I'm attracted to like that, it's generally fine.

But you can't find every woman in your age group hot, can you? :D

On 2/3/2017 at 11:05 PM, NullVector said:

What I think I find more awkward is the trying to 'escalate' anything beyond that baseline of casual friendliness. I have problems with social interactions where there are a lot of unspoken rules operating. I don't really get how something like flirting is supposed to work. I'm paranoid about coming across as inappropriate, or pushy, or harassing someone.

Yes, it's very bad that there are no clear-cut rules.

 

Something like affirmative consent (which would be pretty clear cut) simply does not work as long as we have firmly implanted ideas (which were true when Ovid wrote his ars amatoria as they are now) how romance should work... like “You do not ask for the first kiss.”.

 

For AC to work, people would have to be much more relaxed about asking... but not too relaxed, right? Language itself can be obviously inappropriate. And it stays so on the meta-level. If someone feels uncomfortable about sexual innuendo, it will surely not help if someone says “Excuse me, I now want to create a bit of sexual tension. Am I allowed to proceed?”. AC is really right from the ivory tower.

 

So I would say that it is impossible to flirt without potentially coming across as pushy or inappropriate. Gaffes are a part of life.

 

Harassing is a different thing. Wouldn't the bad flirter back off when he gets a negative reaction? Exactly! The harasser, on the other hand, does not care. Also, the harasser makes advances in environments where people feel trapped, like the workplace.

 

I doubt you would do something like this, so you're fine. You seem like someone with a driving OCD (and it is actually true: no level of cautiousness, skill and responsibility can guarantee one won't run over a child. But one should not give up driving because of this fact).

On 2/3/2017 at 11:05 PM, NullVector said:

I'm paranoid about coming across as inappropriate, or pushy, or harassing someone. I don't like eye contact (especially with people I don't know really well) as I find it too intense.

You can always search for eye contact (is this correct English?) in casually friendly situations and practice that way / harden yourself ;)

 

Of course romantic eye contact is a different matter, it's like staring into someone's eyes. Super weird.

On 2/3/2017 at 11:05 PM, NullVector said:

Stuff like that could all contribute to making it awkward. I figured none of that surrounding awkwardness would really matter, if I met somebody I 'clicked' with enough, so I was pretty relaxed about a lack of relationships/sex throughout my 20s. Now, I don't know. I feel like I may need to do things more actively outside my comfort zone to make something happen... (but, as I said earlier, that's never something I felt forced to do by societal pressures, so I'd kinda have to force myself...)

Also my family puts pressure on me. >:( I hope that my sister soon marries and has many children, maybe they leave me alone then.

 

I just accepted that there is no one I would click with romantically. Plus, I'm 100% incompatible with allo women. Case closed.

 

And forcing yourself may make you remove your question mark in your profile and replace it with “aromantic”. :D

 

Now again to flirting... for allos there is flirting in various strengths, but I think we should rather distinguish different types:

  1. friendship flirting (for the lack of a better word)
  2. romantic flirting
  3. sexual flirting

As overwhelming empirical evidence suggests, romantic flirting really is as cheesy as suspected. Only some inexperienced allos do 1. though they want to do 2.! It's not enough to be inventively charming and nice and make your flirt-recipient elude bashful smiles. That's just green hearts, not red ones.

 

No, no, after some warm-up the allo should really want at some point stare the near total stranger in the eyes for four seconds, make a tacky compliment, touch the stranger's face and so on. And before investing more than 3 hours in the person the allo goes for the kiss. Jeeeeeeez...

 

I'm sure with sufficient training many aros can learn to romantically flirt, but not only is any natural instinct missing, they are probably mega weirded out by themselves. It's like a horse playing a stegosaurus, sure, it's possible but honestly just sad and not at all nice for the horse.

On 2/4/2017 at 10:26 PM, NullVector said:

Yeah, me too. I especially feel you on the "this way I'll sure as hell not ever find out". I always worked on the assumption that my summoning up the courage/recklessness/stupidity(!) to even attempt anything 'romantic' would need to be predicated on my finding the other person super-awesome from a friendship perspective first. So the idea of "romance first" made literally zero sense to me. Like, the opposite of sense, even. It took me a LONG time to figure out that most other people don't operate that way...

Since I know about the concept of aromanticism, everything fell into pieces very fast and this makes intuitive sense to me now. But before, I found this extremely confusing / nonsensical, too! Not only it's “romance first”, it's seen as profoundly wrong to want it differently.

 

Hey, even Randall Munroe gets it:

 

friends.png

(hint to lurkers: if you find this comic confusing, you might be aro :D)

 

To me, minus the secret crush, it doesn't get better than what this girl would have got! :arolove:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Kojote said:

Yes, same here. How people go romance first even though they literally don't know jackshit about the person in question is mind boggling to me. How could someone possibly know that they'd want that person in their life without anything to base that on apart from looks and first impression? Does not compute o__o

 

People here actually make sense. Don't make me go back out there! Please!! :rofl:

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DeltaV

Boy, that is a detailed response you wrote! Thanks :)

I like the sound of Affirmative Consent quite a lot, actually. I think I'd be a lot more relaxed about 'romantic' scenarios if that was the standardized way of going about those things. It would help remove a lot of ambiguity around potentially anxiety-inducing questions like "should I try to kiss x now?" if it were standard practice to just ask x "may I kiss you now?" or something! :D.

 

12 hours ago, DeltaV said:

Something like affirmative consent (which would be pretty clear cut) simply does not work as long as we have firmly implanted ideas (which were true when Ovid wrote his ars amatoria as they are now) how romance should work... like “You do not ask for the first kiss.”.

 

I think it's the "firmly implanted ideas" about what relationships should be like that most of us here are trying to get away from. That's why I found things like Relationship Anarchy interesting too. I think the only way to get away from defaulting to the established social scripts vis-a-vis relationships is to instead very explicitly articulate/communicate a desire for something different. Which also ties in with something @Mark wrote above :

 

16 hours ago, Mark said:
20 hours ago, Kojote said:

How people go romance first even though they literally don't know jackshit about the person in question is mind boggling to me. How could someone possibly know that they'd want that person in their life without anything to base that on apart from looks and first impression? Does not compute o__o

Maybe it's because romantic relationships can be quite standardised. So individuals matter less than being able to follow the script. Certainly the aim of the whole thing appears to be to merge into a couple...

 

It strikes me that the probability of reverting to a standardized relationship 'script' goes roughly in proportion to how vague and subtextual the social interactions are kept. As it probably takes an explicit effort to break out of an implicit social habit... (unless you just happen to meet another aro or something? :aropride:)

 

12 hours ago, DeltaV said:

Harassing is a different thing. Wouldn't the bad flirter back off when he gets a negative reaction? Exactly! The harasser, on the other hand, does not care. Also, the harasser makes advances in environments where people feel trapped, like the workplace.

 

I doubt you would do something like this, so you're fine. You seem like someone with a driving OCD (and it is actually true: no level of cautiousness, skill and responsibility can guarantee one won't run over a child. But one should not give up driving because of this fact).

That's a good analogy, thanks. I can probably afford to relax a bit and make a few (minor) mistakes! Incidentally, I never learnt how to drive! xD

 

12 hours ago, DeltaV said:

And forcing yourself may make you remove your question mark in your profile and replace it with “aromantic”. :D

Maybe! :D

 

12 hours ago, DeltaV said:

I'm sure with sufficient training many aros can learn to romantically flirt, but not only is any natural instinct missing, they are probably mega weirded out by themselves. It's like a horse playing a stegosaurus, sure, it's possible but honestly just sad and not at all nice for the horse.

 

Another good analogy! So, you mentioned that you consider there to be three types of 'flirting' (friendly, romantic and sexual) - but how would you see the differences between romantic and sexual flirting playing out? (and would allo people tend to confuse the two?)

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2017 at 10:28 AM, NullVector said:

Boy, that is a detailed response you wrote! Thanks :)

Glad you liked it. I was afraid of being verbose.

On 2/6/2017 at 10:28 AM, NullVector said:

I like the sound of Affirmative Consent quite a lot, actually. I think I'd be a lot more relaxed about 'romantic' scenarios if that was the standardized way of going about those things. It would help remove a lot of ambiguity around potentially anxiety-inducing questions like "should I try to kiss x now?" if it were standard practice to just ask x "may I kiss you now?" or something! :D.

It's not that I disagree with the idea behind AC. But it's not going to gain acceptance, there is a limit about what can realistically be achieved. Like Esperanto just isn't going to be the universal second language.

On 2/6/2017 at 10:28 AM, NullVector said:

Another good analogy! So, you mentioned that you consider there to be three types of 'flirting' (friendly, romantic and sexual) - but how would you see the differences between romantic and sexual flirting playing out? (and would allo people tend to confuse the two?)

(Pure) Romantic flirting can be seen in G-rated movies. It's flirting which is not sexually charged but hints at the obsession, the possessiveness, the rose-tinted glasses and the yearning to emotionally merge deeply with the object of desire, which is so peculiar to romantic attraction. You just don't say “I keep getting lost in your eyes” to a friend, right?

 

(Pure) Sexual flirting is about creating sexual innuendo. Needless to say it is the most risky variant of the three. The sledgehammer version of it is making crude sexual jokes (bonus points for being unoriginal and making them at inappropriate situations).

 

Now, for allos, I think, there is only flirting in different strength. Why? Of course, they usually mix 2. + 3. (and 1.), but that's just stating the end result. The explanation lies in the strange connections between sex and romance for allos.

 

Naively, one would think that since sexual attraction is more common than romantic attraction (in terms of numbers of “targets”) and so can be experienced “purely,” there should be no confusion. But for the typical allo, sex is a strong crush-inducer, it produces emotions of closeness and intimacy. And because of this, there is a good chance to be able to f*** your way into a relationship (= If you already got that far, the rest should be easy).

 

Romantic attraction, on the other hand, seeks (except for romantic asexuals) its fulfillment in sexual activity. Because for whatever reason (going back to the Bible where sexual activity is described as “knowing someone”), it is seen as completely natural that sex can provide a nigh mystical, deep emotional connection between two persons. O.o

 

Sorry to sound so unromantic, but this is an idea which strikes me as nearly obscene. I experience sex as a raw and rather animalistic act. And that's all there is to it. Dirty fun. Really. :$ How on earth should this activity bring me emotionally closer to someone? If I want that, I rather talk about my feelings.:aropride:

 

I haven't uncovered all the subtleties of this amalgamation, :D and all this are just very general observations. But somewhere here must also lie the explanation that allos conflate and mix romantic and sexual flirting. And, most people aren't that good with coming up with romantic-deep or clever-sexy responses, so body language, looks, tone of voice and so on become more important*, which are even more ambiguous than language.

 

* a Folgers 2009 commercial is a fine example of this. If you make actors play siblings, better make sure they aren't attracted to each other! :D Though completely innocent in what is said, there is a strange tension “brewing” (if you excuse the pun) between those two, which makes this commercial really just very weird. 100% based on non-verbal communication.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DeltaV said:

It's not that I disagree with the idea behind AC. But it's not going to gain acceptance, there is a limit about what can realistically be achieved. Like Esperanto just isn't going to be the universal second language.

One the one hand, yes. On the other hand, I guess you only gotta find one other person on the planet who thinks the idea isn't totally screwy and would be willing to give it a try :P.

 

21 hours ago, DeltaV said:

Romantic attraction, on the other hand, seeks (except for romantic asexuals) its fulfillment in sexual activity. Because for whatever reason (going back to the Bible where sexual activity is described as “knowing someone”), it is seen as completely natural that sex can provide a nigh mystical, deep emotional connection between two persons. O.o

 

Sorry to sound so unromantic, but this is an idea which strikes me as nearly obscene. I experience sex as a raw and rather animalistic act. And that's all there is to it. Dirty fun. Really. :$ How on earth should this activity bring me emotionally closer to someone? If I want that, I rather talk about my feelings.:aropride:

 

Interesting thoughts. Yeah, all of our cultural baggage around sex does seem like the most gigantic mess to try and unravel. Plus you've also got a millennia old sex = sin cultural association baked in from the same Judeo-Christian religious influence that co-exists uneasily with the sex = mystical awakening that you already highlighted! (it seems to me that it's only 'sinful' if it's actually enjoyed for its own sake - y'know without the enjoyment coexisting with a more 'utilitarian' basis like procreation - how messed up is that?!) In essence it's just a physical act. Don't see why it should have any inherent meaning. Different people could bring totally different meanings to it. I do like the sound of some 'dirty fun' though! :D

 

21 hours ago, DeltaV said:

so body language, looks, tone of voice and so on become more important

Oh shit, I'm doomed then! There's gonna be no Folgers in my cup :rofl:

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/02/2017 at 0:37 AM, DeltaV said:

(Pure) Romantic flirting can be seen in G-rated movies. It's flirting which is not sexually charged but hints at the obsession, the possessiveness, the rose-tinted glasses and the yearning to emotionally merge deeply with the object of desire, which is so peculiar to romantic attraction. You just don't say “I keep getting lost in your eyes” to a friend, right?

 

(Pure) Sexual flirting is about creating sexual innuendo. Needless to say it is the most risky variant of the three. The sledgehammer version of it is making crude sexual jokes (bonus points for being unoriginal and making them at inappropriate situations).

 

Now, for allos, I think, there is only flirting in different strength. Why? Of course, they usually mix 2. + 3. (and 1.), but that's just stating the end result. The explanation lies in the strange connections between sex and romance for allos.

The difficulty for allos is that romantic flirting may well be repulsive. Possibly even more so when it's purely romantic. From either a receiving or giving POV.

 

On 08/02/2017 at 0:37 AM, DeltaV said:

Naively, one would think that since sexual attraction is more common than romantic attraction (in terms of numbers of “targets”) and so can be experienced “purely,” there should be no confusion. But for the typical allo, sex is a strong crush-inducer, it produces emotions of closeness and intimacy. And because of this, there is a good chance to be able to f*** your way into a relationship (= If you already got that far, the rest should be easy).

It also seems to work the other way around. Since for at least some allos sex can be very romantically coded.
 

On 08/02/2017 at 0:37 AM, DeltaV said:

Romantic attraction, on the other hand, seeks (except for romantic asexuals) its fulfillment in sexual activity. Because for whatever reason (going back to the Bible where sexual activity is described as “knowing someone”), it is seen as completely natural that sex can provide a nigh mystical, deep emotional connection between two persons. 

I'd be very wary about linking this to anything older than around 500 years. Since the concept of romance is very modern. With the idea of it being the basis for sexual relationships only having been around for about a century.
 

On 08/02/2017 at 0:37 AM, DeltaV said:

Sorry to sound so unromantic, but this is an idea which strikes me as nearly obscene. I experience sex as a raw and rather animalistic act. And that's all there is to it. Dirty fun. Really. :$ How on earth should this activity bring me emotionally closer to someone? If I want that, I rather talk about my feelings.:aropride:

I think it's something best with friends. To have the emotional connection there...

 

On 08/02/2017 at 0:37 AM, DeltaV said:

I haven't uncovered all the subtleties of this amalgamation, :D and all this are just very general observations. But somewhere here must also lie the explanation that allos conflate and mix romantic and sexual flirting. And, most people aren't that good with coming up with romantic-deep or clever-sexy responses, so body language, looks, tone of voice and so on become more important*, which are even more ambiguous than language.

Also something which I, being on the autistic spectrum, struggle with especially.  Both because I hate ambiguity and find these forms of "communication" to often be invisible anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark said:

I think it's something best with friends. To have the emotional connection there...

I would have to agree. The only time I've ever been comfortable with sex was with someone I developed a deep friendship with first

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2017 at 0:31 PM, Mark said:

I think it's something best with friends. To have the emotional connection there...

Well, sex is an activity that has to be approached with some seriousness. So I much prefer that I can trust someone and there is mutual respect, which would be the case with friends. But it doesn't bring me emotionally closer to someone at all and an already existing emotional connection doesn't make it more enjoyable for me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2017 at 11:06 PM, SoulWolf said:

Sometimes I feel curious about what sex would actually be like. I'm not really repulsed by the whole idea, sometimes it seems like it could even be nice, if it's with a friend I trust 100%, and there isn't any confusing romantic stuff involved. But then I'd have to be 120% sure it isn't going to screw up the friendship, and all that kind of stuff, etc, ... it's just not worth the hassle.

I hope that you don't leave out some experience which may feel great to you because of what I say, but I'm going to state the obvious, that I doubt as ace you'll miss much if you don't have sex. :)

 

As a very young child (like five?) I had, for whatever reason, an unquenchable curiosity to figure “all that stuff” out. At some point, after repeatedly, over and over being told that I'm too young to understand, my mother finally gave in and (since I didn't easily give up asking) explained it to me in detail.

 

Though I engaged in some kind of child-like pleasuring myself, at this age I didn't experience sexual attraction at all, of course. Because of this I imagined sex as some kind of relaxed mutual masturbation “with the help of another person's body” (really like many aces do) and thought something along the line “Ok, sounds interesting. When I'm older, I might try that.”

 

But sexual attraction changed everything, it made sex from something that “sounds interesting / maybe nice” to a high I get without drugs.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, DeltaV said:

Though I engaged in some kind of child-like pleasuring myself, at this age I didn't experience sexual attraction at all, of course. Because of this I imagined sex as some kind of relaxed mutual masturbation “with the help of another person's body” (really like many aces do) and thought something along the line “Ok, sounds interesting. When I'm older, I might try that.”

 

But sexual attraction changed everything, it made sex from something that “sounds interesting / maybe nice” to a high I get without drugs.

That's actually pretty interesting, thanks for sharing. I never got past the point of thinking of it as relaxed mutual masturbation or something like that. When people seem like they're sexually attracted to me (by what they say or do), it creeps me out. I've never really known how that feels, I suppose, or why anyone would take it as a compliment. :P

 

What was the 'change over' to sexual attraction like, and did you understand what was happening? Was it gradual or sudden?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember that feeling sexual attraction kicked in when I was 12 and it happened relatively fast. Okay, it was not from one day to the other but developed in perhaps a few weeks. I was attracted to guys first and became gradually hetero over the course of a couple of years (nb: I never had crushes on guys. Being aro was a constant).


When I began to feel sexual attraction, it felt really wrong, because it was so strong. I thought I was a pervert and was ashamed that I just randomly got aroused in the most innocent situations.


There was one very hot sexy boy who drove me C-R-A-Z-Y. His mere presence would get me aroused and this was not just theoretically thinking “Oh, sex with this hottie would be fun” like I do now, no, he literally made me stutter and weak in my knees. I couldn't think straight when I talked to him because I was blinded by a haze of vivid sexual fantasies. Sometimes getting a boner. Uh... O.o


I wonder why sexual attraction dropped that much over the years. Maybe the male brain develops a tolerance to testosterone? :D But then there are also guys who tell you that their sex drive didn't decrease at all.


With sexual attraction, sex is anything but relaxed, no, it's very exciting. I'm hesitant to describe it as aggressive, because this will probably be misunderstood as if there was something REALLY bad about it, like hidden violent impulses or being rapey deep down. It is of course not aggressive in this way. But still, sex is so strongly focused on the other person's body and doing those peculiar physical things and achieving satisfaction, that this word kind of fits (=> I can understand that it creeps you out if other people are sexually attracted to you).

 

Sexual activity usually ends with an orgasm for me. My first orgasm was a bit shocking because it was so intense. I knew about orgasms long before puberty, but didn't understand they should feel like a seizure. But directly after experiencing the first, I quickly concluded “... this must have been an orgasm”.

 

The quality of orgasms varies very much. The lowest quality, which happen rarely, could be described as ”botched”. Like in my teens when masturbating and suddenly mom knocks at the door. :$ Physiologically something happens but I don't feel anything. The majority of orgasms are “okay”: nice, but nothing special. And then some have earth-shattering quality. Because of my unwillingness to be in a romantic relationship, I'm usually celibate for long periods of time and so plain vanilla sex with a reasonably hot woman, is usually all that's needed for an orgasm in the earth-shattering range. Yes, it sounds really, really pathetic to be that easily “impressed” but that's my aro life.

 

Those earth-shattering orgasms are the most intense pleasurable feelings I can experience. I have very limited experience with drugs, but this is the only thing that compares to it. Never did anything besides cannabis, and this only two times. I can't stand inhaling smoke, so once it was by eating hashish (dissolved in a lot of fat) and the second time it was with a vaporizer. The vaporizer didn't make me slowly feel happy, silly, sedated and zoned-out like eating did, but instead gave me an “energetic” high, culminating in a wave of extreme pleasure for a few seconds. The quality was of course different to an earth-shattering orgasm, it was more a “spiritual” experience, but the intensity came very close to it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2017 at 4:05 PM, Holmbo said:

Another thing that just popped into my head. Is it possible for someone to be alloromantic and sexual but have no ties between romantic attraction and sexual one? Maybe they would be good at answering this question?

Yes. People who are heteroromantic homosexual or vice versa would be an example of this. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sex is kind of weird for me. I experience 3 types of sexual attraction:

  1. Spoiler

     

    1. Dominance-based: The desire to sexually dominate someone, BDSM style. Seems to exclusively be directed towards cis, straight men, who have a repulsive personality (e.g. racist, misogynist, homophobic etc.). Basically I want to hate-fuck them--in a way that brings both of us sexual gratification. I like the idea of being able to sexually attract someone who is bigoted against me, and then being able to make them a slave to their own desire. I like the power in being able to force people to admit their own hypocrisy, to accept that they fail to align to their own hateful ideals. This isn't a sexual desire I'd ever attempt to act on IRL. I just enjoy fantasizing about it.
       
    2. Vanilla: Textbook definition of sexual attraction. Carnal, intense, fleeting, and impersonal (i.e. I have no emotional attachment to the stranger I'm attracted to). Happens towards individuals of all genders, though I have a bias towards androgynous individuals and those who present femme. I don't act on this desire due to the high probability that the strangers are probably alloromantic and will assume all sexual advances are romantic. Also, I'm trans, and too cynical to think that anyone would respect my identity in the bedroom (i.e. they'd touch me in ways that induce dysphoria). 
       
    3. Repulsive or Indifferent: Same feeling as #2, but attraction becomes repulsive because I have an emotional attachment to the individual (generally platonic). I'll still feel attracted to the friend, but I'll feel disgusted with myself. After I've been friends with the person for long enough, the sexual repulsion will fade and become sexual indifference. I will no longer feel disgusted by my attraction, but I'll feel confused or weirded out if the friend ever acts sexually towards me. 

     

     

Despite how my most euphoric sexual attractions are directed towards strangers, I still consider sexual acts as highly intimate--sexual acts being defined as kissing, making out, feeling up, and genital contact. It's one thing to FEEL attraction, and it's another to ACT on that attraction. Because of my vulnerability as a trans person, and also PTSD-related anxiety towards physical contact, I personally could not act sexually, unless I trust my potential sexual partners and communicate with them A LOT. Which is why I view sex, and by extension, physical intimacy in general, as something precious, that shouldn't be done casually. However, most people don't share my background and feelings about sex--nor do I want to force them to share my view. Regardless, I always get triggered by casual physical intimacy, because of the way my brain works.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/02/2017 at 10:05 PM, Holmbo said:

Another thing that just popped into my head. Is it possible for someone to be alloromantic and sexual but have no ties between romantic attraction and sexual one? Maybe they would be good at answering this question?

It would also be possible for someone to have corresponding sexual and romantic orientations whilst not experiencing both towards the same person.
Kind of wondering how often it would happen for an alloromantic allosexual to start a romo-sexual relationship in the hope that sexual attraction would develop...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2017 at 6:08 PM, Ettina said:

 

On 2/2/2017 at 10:05 PM, Holmbo said:

Another thing that just popped into my head. Is it possible for someone to be alloromantic and sexual but have no ties between romantic attraction and sexual one? Maybe they would be good at answering this question?

Yes. People who are heteroromantic homosexual or vice versa would be an example of this. 

 

 

Does anybody here actually experience that? i.e. sexual attraction to only women and romantic attraction to only men (or vice-versa)? 

If so, I would be very interested in hearing the experience described by them :) 

(especially given that we are trying to tease out some of the differences between romantic and sexual attraction here)

 

It wouldn't surprise me if this was rather rare though - would a 'split attraction' model really allow for that much of a split?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:/ Yikes. I mean "yikes" not in the sense that such an orientation split is "problematic," but because I bet they must get a lot of hate and insensitivity from others because of their split. Society expects romance and sex to be connected, and the fact that they experience the romance but don't want the sex--experience the sex, but don't want the romance...that's like, the worst of both worlds. That's like the struggles of being an allosexual aro, combined with the struggles of being an alloromantic ace. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, omitef said:

:/ Yikes. I mean "yikes" not in the sense that such an orientation split is "problematic," but because I bet they must get a lot of hate and insensitivity from others because of their split. Society expects romance and sex to be connected, and the fact that they experience the romance but don't want the sex--experience the sex, but don't want the romance...that's like, the worst of both worlds. That's like the struggles of being an allosexual aro, combined with the struggles of being an alloromantic ace. 

 

 

I've seen hate from the LGBT+ community about this actually. I don't want to dredge up examples, but I have seen people say that split attraction like that is fake and "homophobic" in some way?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Spud Yuuuuuuuup. Apparently, if you experience any same-gender attraction, you MUST experience it both romantically and sexually, otherwise you're just afraid of committing to a same-gender romantic relationship due to the stigma.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, omitef said:

@Spud Yuuuuuuuup. Apparently, if you experience any same-gender attraction, you MUST experience it both romantically and sexually, otherwise you're just afraid of committing to a same-gender romantic relationship due to the stigma.

I`m not a sexual aro and I think that`s really dumb.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, omitef said:

@Spud Yuuuuuuuup. Apparently, if you experience any same-gender attraction, you MUST experience it both romantically and sexually, otherwise you're just afraid of committing to a same-gender romantic relationship due to the stigma.

I once encountered someone who insisted that all bisexuals must be biromantic. But, curiously, not that all biromantics must be bisexual.
Effectively claiming that sexual attraction must be associated with romantic attraction.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...