Darkoshi

(I'm splitting my prior post into 2 separate ones, in order to expand on a subject.)

My impression of the Transparent pilot:
I'm intrigued by 2 of the main characters (Maura & Ali), and somewhat put off by the other 2. I was quite put off by the sex scenes, and by the many shots of bare breasts, and squeezing of breasts. The bathroom scene showing bare female buttocks didn't bother me but together with all the rest, the show seems like it was scripted to attract viewers who like female nudity and sex scenes. So while I'm intrigued by part of the story, I'm also put off by a lot of it.

.

Not liking the nudity and sex scenes probably makes me sound like a prude. Maybe I am? But I don't think that movies/films/books shouldn't be allowed to have scenes like those; I just don't personally like them.

Why don't I like them? What is it about them that so puts me off? It's not just any sex scenes, or any nudity that puts me off. Only certain kinds. (Although most explicit mainstream sex scenes would fall into that category, which is why I don't watch porn.)

Take the show "Gray's Anatomy". Its characters were having sex or talking about sex and relationships all the time, but those scenes didn't bother me much (beyond rolling my eyes and thinking "there they go at it again!"). But most of those scenes weren't very explicit and didn't involve nudity.

I suspect that what I feel is similar to the aversion that some hetero people feel when watching explicit gay scenes. But what exactly is it that turns me off, and why?

( Light spoilers follow )

New words:

andromantic (or androromantic), gyneromantic, and ambiromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) expressing masculinity or femininity or intersex/third gender-mixing (respectively) without implying the gender of the individual experiencing the attraction; often used by asexuals with a non-binary gender identity.

Also...

Skolioromantic: romantic attraction to gender variant individuals. (Info on the prefix "skolio"...)

Andro-Skolioromantic: romantic attraction towards male-identified people as well as gender variant individuals.

Just read something that made me think. It probably only seems significant because I'm up too late.

A person goes out and meets someone else, and they get along well. One of the persons unexpectedly asks the other if they'd like to come home with them. The other person accepts.

Does the person who asks the question generally assume that the other person, by their acceptance, wants to have sex with them? Is the expectation of sex implicit in the question?

Does the person who answers the question generally assume that the other person wants to have sex with them? Is the expectation of sex implicit in their acceptance?


How could an asexual person navigate a situation like that? What if they like the other person and want to be friends, and want to see what the other person's house is like (or to show them their own), and spend fun time together, and possibly even get into a relationship, but have no desire nor intention of having sex?

Should they state outright that they are asexual and don't want to have sex? Assuming that the other person is not asexual and was expecting sex, that leads to disappointment on both sides.
Is there any point for an asexual person to go out and meet other people, unless it is an event specifically targeted towards asexual people?

I don't understand main-stream sexuality, except from an outsider's perspective. I only understand it based on the media I've been exposed to, not because it makes sense to me. I don't understand why female breasts are considered sexual, but men's chests aren't. I don't understand why breasts with nipples visible are considered nude and sexual, while breasts with pasties or tassles covering the nipples aren't. I don't understand why people like sucking on nipples or penises. I don't understand why TV show characters tongue-kiss* each other so much and so often; I don't understand why people are supposedly drawn to that activity. I don't understand why having sex is supposed to be part of a relationship, and why not having sex is supposed to indicate a lack of a relationship. I'm sure it makes intrinsic sense to most other people, but it doesn't to me; it's all hear-say to me.

While thinking about pasties and tassles, the thought occurred to me, what if I guy were naked except for a pasty/tassle on the end of his penis? Would the pasty/tassle render him non-nude? heheheh....

.

There seem to be a fair number of butch lesbians and butch-presenting females who are deeply offended by being referred to with male pronouns... they expect to be perceived as physically female based on the gender cues of their body, in spite of their clothing and presentation, and they interpret a male pronoun as an insult. They expect everyone to know that a masculine-presenting female still expects to be referred to with female pronouns, and that the only reason for someone to use male pronouns for them would be purposeful spite.

There are also a lot of transgendered people who are deeply offended by being referred to with a pronoun which doesn't match their clothing and presentation. They expect to be perceived and treated as the gender which matches their presentation, regardless of the gender cues of their body. They may interpret being referred to with the other pronoun as purposeful spite. They expect everyone to know that a person expects to be referred to with the pronoun which matches their gender presentation.

I think there's more emotional pain involved for transgendered people when they are referred to by their non-preferred pronoun, as that indicates that they have failed to pass as their preferred gender, and that their internal identity and self have not even been recognized. Whereas for butch females, it's more a perception of their identity and self having been recognized and belittled.

I don't think there's going to be a solution to the dichotomy of pronoun expectations any time soon.

.

* edited to replace "snog" with "tongue-kiss"... To me, a "kiss" is a simple peck on the cheeks or lips, whereas "snog" sounds like faces being shoved together; noses being squished hoggish-like; mouths open and tongues shoving. But the dictionary definition of snog is "kissing and cuddling", so maybe it isn't the right word after all. But "french kiss" sounds rather outdated and childish, and "tongue-kiss" doesn't seem much more descriptive... it sounds like 2 tongues pecking each other lightly... Oh, well, whatever.

Does the term "sexual attraction" necessarily indicate a desire to engage in sexual activities with the object of one's attraction? I mean, ignoring any logical reasons not to do so (eg., already being in a relationship with someone else, or not wanting to get pregnant or impregnate someone else, or not wanting to have sex with someone until you know them better, etc.). Given that there were no logical reasons not to, does it indicate a desire to engage in sexual activities? (Where sexual activities are defined as contact between the other person's body and your groin area, or vice versa.)

I've been calling it sexual attraction, that rare, special feeling I sometimes get in response to someone else or in response to reading something, even though it is not a desire to engage in sexual activities. So, perhaps using that term is misleading, and I should not call it that.

I also call things erotic for me, even though they do not result in me desiring to engage in sexual activities. Is that also a misleading term to use?

The kind of reaction I get seems sexual or erotic to me, because it has, at least once, involved sexual nerves in my groin area and/or having certain parts down there swell. On one occasion, I felt butterflies in my stomach. Generally though, it is a buzzing/tingling/inner vibration kind of feeling throughout my core, along with a mental feeling of intense contentment and/or glee.

It'd be like having my strings strummed, if I had strings.

Is it more apt to call these kinds of reactions "romantic attraction"? Some asexuals say they feel romantic attraction towards other people. But I don't have a good idea of what "romantic attraction" means either, other than in this case, liking someone without necessarily wanting to have sex with them. It is even less clear to me than what "sexual attraction" is. In my mind, the word "romance" conjures images of candle-light dinners and people drinking wine and wearing silky clothing, and things like that. That doesn't seem related to attraction. So is there any kind of special mental/physical reaction to feeling romantic attraction to someone? Or is it not much different than just finding someone fun to be around?

I often try to comprehend what role sex plays in a relationship, for sexual people.

There are so many things which indicate that for most sexual men, a relationship without sex is unthinkable; that sex is the most important thing about a relationship to them. Which generally gives me the impression that they are only in a relationship in order to have sex. But a lot of the time, that doesn't seem quite true either.

Perhaps a relationship without sex is to them like a relationship without touch would be to me. I could get some things which I'd need from a relationship, without there being any physical touch, but that one lack would be a large one. I wouldn't choose such a relationship unless there was no chance at a relationship including touch. I would feel the lack of being able to hold hands, lean heads together, hug, etc. Being hugged, and being held, is important to me.

Any relationship just based on touch would not suffice for me - I'd have to be attracted to the other person in the first place, and there'd need to be a certain amount of compatibility. So even though touch is very important, it's not the only important thing, nor necessarily the most important thing.

I am asexual. That's something I used to know, but which I came to be unsure of for the last several years. But it is true. Asexuality can take different forms, but I just read a definition again which fits me quite well: I do not have a need for sex.

I do not have a sex drive. I have no desire for sex. I have been fine without it, and would be fine without ever having it again. All else equal, I would probably prefer to not ever have sex again. I do on a rare occasion experience sexual arousal, which feels great, but even that does not make me "need" or desire sex. I feel horny more often than I feel arousal, and I masturbate when I feel horny. I get more physical satisfaction from masturbation than from sex - I get little physical pleasure from sex itself. I have to be in a certain head-space in order for someone else touching me to even feel erotic, and that head-space is not easy to come by.

I do not experience sexual attraction in the common sense. When I do, on rare occasions, feel what might be considered sexual attraction, or a sexual response to someone, it is not based on their appearance so much as on their attitude and mannerisms in how they interact with me. When I do feel such an attraction, it is a good feeling, but not something that makes me want to have sex with the person.

I like hugging and cuddling and physical touch, but sex itself is messy, time-consuming, rather boring, and only enjoyable insofar as I feel good that the other person feels good. In the beginning, it was somewhat erotic and enjoyable because I was able to get into a certain head-space with it, but that has faded. Even if I were able to get my head-space back, it would be more enjoyable for me without the sex. Not that I wouldn't want any physicality - I would - but I just don't desire the physical act of sex.

Was just watching part of an episode of "Everwood" on TV... the episode description said something along the lines of "After Kyle has a bad date with a girl from school, Ephram's suspicions are raised." Which piqued my interest. And the plot did turn out to be what I thought, that the Kyle character admits to being gay.

But how long till we have a show like that, where instead of the character coming out as gay, they come out as asexual? Why is it assumed that when someone doesn't enjoy dating people of one sex, that they must be attracted to the other sex? Why can't one of these characters come out and say "I have no interest in going out on dates with girls or with boys, nor in sex, and I don't think I ever will. I can't understand why my friends are interested in all this dating and kissing and sex stuff. It seems weird to me." etc.

It seems to me that in TV shows, the age at which boys and girls are portrayed as being interested in dating and the other sex has dropped significantly since when I was growing up. Nowadays, they even show 5-year old youngsters wanting to go on "dates" and to kiss (even if at that age, it is only shown as a peck on the cheek or lips). And I wonder if this a reflection on reality, or if kids, in watching these TV shows, will feel like doing it because it is being portrayed as the "normal thing"... ie., if reality will start reflecting TV.

When I watch shows on TV, sometimes I can't tell if certain scenes are supposed to be believable or not - if they are supposed to accurately portray how real-life people might feel & act, or if the scene is supposed to be an over-the-top parody - because the scenes do not seem believable from my own viewpoint. I was channel-surfing recently, and came across an episode of "Seventh Heaven". This is an odd, over-the-top show to begin with... (in this episode all the characters were using the euphemism "to have an adult relationship" instead of saying "to have sex")... but in this episode, the youngest girl of the family, now a teenager I guess, has a boyfriend... and he walked into the room where she was, they looked at each other for a brief moment, and then they grabbed each other and started tongue-kissing as if they'd been YEARNING to do so.

Apparently this was supposed to be funny. But it seemed weird to me. Would a boyfriend and girlfriend (etc.) really be yearning to tongue-kiss each other that badly, that they'd go after each other like that, just on the spur of the moment? I don't know.

One of the recents posts in the asexuality community seems quite apt to me. In it, nobleplatypus compares sex to kayaking. Read the post.

Now me being fairly asexual, the comparison seems completely logical to me, and very amusing. However, one of the commenters made the point that kayaking and sex are very different, and that the thrill of kayaking can never be as gratifying as an orgasm. This seems to point out the difference between sexual and asexual people to me very well. To many asexual people, sex and/or orgasms aren't such a great thing. We can't understand why sexual people feel they are such great and wonderful things. And vice versa.

Hey, I've already met one more wonderful person. ... He seems nice, intelligent, and interesting, and he's a Dom. Although he lives somewhat farther away than would be convenient, and I'm not sure if we would be sexually compatible. But, cool. Who knows?

We were chatting about some things, and I realized that I'm currently in an in-between state... a state of uncertainty about what I want or don't want, at least sexually, in relationships with other people. Because I haven't had enough experience yet with doing sexual things with other people, to know if that is something I could enjoy at all, or not. If I were certain, I could just state from the outset that I was looking for someone who didn't want sex at all. Or I could state that I don't mind sex, but that it isn't at all enjoyable for me, by itself. Or if it turns out that I could enjoy sex, then it wouldn't be much of an issue. But as it is, I'm still not sure, and that makes me feel trepidation. And I'm really not going to be sure, until I actually try things out with people... with various people... until I have enough real experience to have such certainty.