Polyamory and asexuality

Periwinkle

New member
There are all of four forums on the asexual tag. XD
One thread is really surprising: "Is it possible to be emotionally poly?" It seems baffling to me that this would be . . . baffling. I always thought of non-physical love as just as intense as physical love, and personally preferable.
So there's a bit of the ace perspective: "Sex? Why?" I wonder sometimes if asexuality looks the same to sexual people from the outside as polyamory looks to mono people from the outside.

River: Ha, I've never been asked such forward questions. I'm a fairly private person, but I enjoy informing people, so:
I like being physically comfortable with people I know well, so I'd like one of those relationships where personal space becomes nonexistent. I'm in my first relationship, though (at the tender age of eighteen, I know) so I don't know all that much about myself at this point. Sometimes kissing seems like a good idea to me, sometimes all I can think about is spit (and cooties, ew!). I really don't have much personal information to offer, I'm afraid.
I actually have a lot of ace friends who are very into touch and kissing, and there are ace people who will touch more intimately without it quite becoming sex. And I once read this lovely article about sensual touch and aces who have sex not for the sexual aspect but for the sensation of being close to someone . . . if that makes sense? I wish I could find the article.
 

River

Active member
And I once read this lovely article about sensual touch and aces who have sex not for the sexual aspect but for the sensation of being close to someone . . . if that makes sense? I wish I could find the article.

Periwinkle,

It takes much courage to really open up with people, whether in a forum like this or anywhere. Thanks for summoning such courage!

You're obviously a bright young man, and a loving, kind person.

Yes, it makes much sense, what you say. "The sensation of being close to someone". Indeed! Genital contact certainly isn't necessary for me in my loving of people! I enjoy that contact. But it is the contact itself that is so wonderful and happy-making -- even when the contact is through words, the sharing of poetry and song, of experiences of all kinds -- whether we're literally touching and being touched or only figuratively.

I used to be mono. In my first love experience I was. And I changed. And I was mostly "gay," and now I am very, very "bi". I've also changed in the way I connect and relate with women, and expect that change to continue. But I've always been just fine just the way I am, and that, I hope, will be how you experience yourself.

Perhaps you'll always remain "ace," and that would be fine, too. Or maybe you, too, will change over time. Who knows? You're fine just as you are, and love is love is love, regardless of how we touch or don't touch one another.

Love is the important thing. As you know.

Thanks again for sharing! Much love to you.
 
Last edited:

Periwinkle

New member
I'm actually working on being more open with people, so thank you.

Of course there's all kinds of touch, that's a very good point. I imagine that in asexual relationships, there are just as broad and array of the types of touch, with the only distinction that there isn't sexual touch, or to the degree that there is in sexual relationships.

If I gave the impression that I'm hoping to make myself less "asexual," I apologize. I'm sex-repulsed, which is what it says on the tin: I'm squicked out by it. Knowing that, I try to emphasize that not all aces are like that. We get stereotyped as clueless prudes often enough (see: Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory) that my being one doesn't help. XD

Much love to you too, River!
 

AutumnalTone

New member
... since that component doesn't need to be satisfied by the asexual partners.

I think that will prove rare. I have one non-sexual romance currently and find it less-than-fulfilling. I'm certainly not going to entertain the thought of any more in the future. I suspect many folk who get involved in a first such relationship will come to the same conclusion.
 

River

Active member
If I gave the impression that I'm hoping to make myself less "asexual," I apologize. I'm sex-repulsed, which is what it says on the tin: I'm squicked out by it. Knowing that, I try to emphasize that not all aces are like that. We get stereotyped as clueless prudes often enough (see: Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory) that my being one doesn't help. XD

Alls I'm saying is that this could be temporary, as nearly everything is.
You're young. I'm getting old-ish. Who knows!? If you're "squicked" now, you may not be squicked later. But if you are, so what? That's fine. The important thing, I think, is the loving part. And that begins with ourselves. A time may come when you're not squicked by sex. And that would be fine, too. Not that there is any difference when it comes to the loving one another aspect. Love is rich and good, however it happens.

By no means do I think you need to change, or that you should be different than how you are at present--or ever. :)
 

River

Active member
I have one non-sexual romance currently and find it less-than-fulfilling. I'm certainly not going to entertain the thought of any more in the future.

I have one too, and it's not in the least "less-than-fulfilling". Well, he's a friend that loves me and that I love, and we share wonderful embraces, kisses, cuddling. My life would be thin without it. I love him just as he is, enormously, happily, without wish of anything different. He's my "straight boyfriend," and that of my boyfriend as well. Such love!:)
 

Periwinkle

New member
I'm actually totally fine with being sex-repulsed; it's not something that upsets me and I don't see it as having a negative impact on my life. It upsets me a bit the importance placed on the fact that I could change. I've sort of heard it all my life: "You'll start liking it when you're older!" I'm not any more interested in it today then I was when I first heard about it. I may become un-squicked; likewise, someone un-squicked now could become squicked.

I think that will prove rare. I have one non-sexual romance currently and find it less-than-fulfilling. I'm certainly not going to entertain the thought of any more in the future. I suspect many folk who get involved in a first such relationship will come to the same conclusion.

Except for the ones that don't, of course. It's lovely that you now know that about yourself, but it's no reason to discourage existing relationships. There are many relationships between sexual and asexual people that are successful and happy.

River: your relationship with your "straight boyfriend" sounds just wonderful!
 

River

Active member
River: your relationship with your "straight boyfriend" sounds just wonderful!

Oh, it is! I love him so.

Love is so much more important to sex, for me. But I adore sexual loving! My adoration is no comment on your sqicked-ness. Difference is good. And my saying that you might change in the future is not a veiled suggestion than you're not perfect just as you are, right now. I think you're wonderful!
 

Periwinkle

New member
Oh, it is! I love him so.

Love is so much more important to sex, for me. But I adore sexual loving! My adoration is no comment on your sqicked-ness. Difference is good. And my saying that you might change in the future is not a veiled suggestion than you're not perfect just as you are, right now. I think you're wonderful!

Oh, shucks. I think you're wonderful, too.
 

River

Active member
>smile<
 

AutumnalTone

New member
It's lovely that you now know that about yourself, but it's no reason to discourage existing relationships.

I've never discouraged any existing relationships and I thank you not to suppose that I have.
 

River

Active member
I've never discouraged any existing relationships and I thank you not to suppose that I have.

No. You have not. And still, one gets the impression that your non-sexual romance is more disappointing than not--perhaps(?). No judgement. Just inquiry.
 

urmila

New member
Loving doe snot mean only sex. Yes it is posiible to have loving, romantic relationship, without actually having sex and I firmly believe this is also polyamory
 

Scott

New member
Loving doe snot mean only sex. Yes it is posiible to have loving, romantic relationship, without actually having sex and I firmly believe this is also polyamory

I'm actually of 2 views concerning this. On the one hand, I agree 100% and have used this argument to say that most people are polyamorous in that they love multiple members of their family at the same time, just not sexually. On the other hand, when describing polyamory to beginners I tend to bring up the fact that it involves a sexual element. I should probably say generally. There's something else, though, and I don't think I'm the only one who feels this way; I generally want to spend more time with women I desire sexually, rather than women I don't see that way (family members, say). Family's great, don't get me wrong, but I'd like to have my own again as well; at the very least a sexual partner, if not children of my own.
 

jujube

New member
from sex to no sex question

What if your relationship ( poly from the start, and sexual, and intimate, etc..) after seven years or so, one partner declares that they will no longer be sexually involved. They claim this is due to work schedule, loss of sex drive, etc....this is rather sudden, and I am wondering what to do now....this person is saying they are DONE with sex at 40, and I ( approaching 68, have not diminished.....)
Please understand, there has been no fight or problem, this just recently became a conversation between us. I am at a loss here.....
 

Scott

New member
What if your relationship ( poly from the start, and sexual, and intimate, etc..) after seven years or so, one partner declares that they will no longer be sexually involved. They claim this is due to work schedule, loss of sex drive, etc....this is rather sudden, and I am wondering what to do now....this person is saying they are DONE with sex at 40, and I ( approaching 68, have not diminished.....)
Please understand, there has been no fight or problem, this just recently became a conversation between us. I am at a loss here.....

While there may not have been an overt fight, perhaps there was something more subtle that you may have missed. In any case, how you wish to proceed may depend greatly on how important you feel having sex with this partner is. If it's not so important, you can leave it at that, but if (as I suspect), it is fairly important, you might want to try to persuade your partner to see a relationship counsellor, or at the very least a mutual friend who can speak to both of you about it, perhaps separately at times. There is actually a film on the subject called Hope Springs. In it, the husband decides he no longer wants to have sex with his wife, citing the same types of reasons that your partner does, and the wife decides that this issue is too important to just let go of, so she pressures him into coming with her to see a relationship counsellor. During their sessions, a lot of very interesting truths are revealed. At the very least, you might wish to see the film yourself; here is a trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s22_Mvikl8

If you and/or your partner are like my dad, therapy may not be for you. In which case, perhaps a friend or even a family member might be able to help. In the case of my parents, I'm not completely sure as to what all the issues were or if sexuality per se played a major role. All I do know is that whatever they tried to fix things, it still didn't work out, they got separated when I was 21 and a few years later, they divorced.
 
Last edited:

kdt26417

Official Greeter
Staff member
Hi jujube,

Do you feel that you need a new partner to fill the gap left by the no-longer-sexually-involved partner? Do you just have one partner? If you have a second partner, is that enough to fill your sexual needs?

I don't mean to pry, just want to understand your situation better.
 

jujube

New member
No, I do not have another partner. I have not met anyone I was that interested in, for friendship or more.
 
Top