tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1343911386688836644.post5798231439496124370..comments2023-03-29T02:20:45.192-07:00Comments on Asexual curiosities: Q+A with Joy Davidson, part 3Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1343911386688836644.post-7029395792575540102010-01-27T09:53:50.547-08:002010-01-27T09:53:50.547-08:00Agreed entirely.Agreed entirely.SlightlyMetaphysicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891271827553008521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1343911386688836644.post-15045421417699960852010-01-27T09:50:00.494-08:002010-01-27T09:50:00.494-08:00I truly wasn't offended. Just horrified! And ...I truly wasn't offended. Just horrified! And mostly, I was teasing in the prior email. Well, poking just a little, too ;) Truly, no need to apologize. <br /><br />We are totally and completely on the same page vis a vis your comments above. We desperately need more open channels about sex, and greater access to them in our society. It's pathetic to think that we are all brainwashed by Hollywood and/or porn, both of which pander to the tastes of the masses--a "masses" who might have different tastes if they had different choices--and the self-perpetuating cycle goes on and on and on. We can also thank the Xian-right and other radically conservative enterprises for the limitations in what can be taught, broadcast, etc.. I am only thankful for the internet and its freedoms.<br />~JoyDr. Joy Davidsonhttp://www.joydavidson.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1343911386688836644.post-46598848716513800932010-01-26T10:11:38.452-08:002010-01-26T10:11:38.452-08:00Hi Joy,
Sorry, I can tell I offended you with the...Hi Joy,<br /><br />Sorry, I can tell I offended you with the idea of conservativeness. I must stress that this was very much a first impression, based on the parts of 20/20 and Montel that I saw, and the general reflections on that within the asexual community. It was a simple case of the format being squeezed into a specialisation of "For sexual freedom" vs. "For caution", when we both know it wasn't really based on this argument at all. I thought that, if I once had that opinion, maybe I should point out where it changed and when I got a fairer view of your ideals to anyone else reading. I humbly apologise, and I've edited the post slightly to reflect this.<br /><br />You're right, your answer was much, much better than mine at adressing the needs of various readers.<br /><br />You point out, quite rightly, that good sex is difficult to achieve. Lots of people for whom sex is a massive and positive part of their lives would have missed out on so much had they quit after disappointment, rather than putting the effort in to make it better.<br />It's difficult, because these two ideas, "A sexless life is no worse than one which includes sex. If that's where you are, go for it." and "Sex needs work. Don't give up, keep trying." are in direct competition, and it's largely impossible to know who would be best with which advice.<br /><br />The answer to this, as far as I can see, doesn't lie with asexuals or sex therapists, but is part of the larger issue that we need to have better information about sex out there. If it's easier to have good sex, it's much easier (but still not very easy) to seperate those who aren't interested in good sex with those who just aren't doing it right.<br /><br />I like your idea of the exceptional case. It's certainly true for some demisexuals that they feel no sexual attraction until one person breaks that rule, and understandable that they don't throw off the idea of asexuality and think of themselves as 100% non-asexual.<br />I also think the idea of changing values through time is interesting. Asexuality is a social category, and maybe it sets itself against socially defined, rather than real, ideas of sexual attraction (I don't know if this is still making any sense). So there's an idea now that people who don't get that 'hubba hubba' moment aren't properly sexual, and asexuality offers a way for these people to understand themselves in relation to quite a conformative sexual society. Maybe if there was more freedom to have a slow, steady increase of sexual attraction at your own pace, a lot of them wouldn't identify as asexual.SlightlyMetaphysicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891271827553008521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1343911386688836644.post-56093127854376188892010-01-26T08:05:57.230-08:002010-01-26T08:05:57.230-08:00You know, we are mostly on the same page here. (Th...You know, we are mostly on the same page here. (Though I had to grimace at the idea that you'd thought I was conservative! I must have really screwed up if I left *that* impression! Cautious, sometimes, I guess. But not conservative. )<br /><br />I should add that in writing an answer to a question such as this, my other primary purpose is to provide information to everyone else who is reading and thinking similar thoughts as the writer-- and probably hungry for information about how desire *really* functions, vs. storybook or typically male perspectives. If I had only asked the kind of questions you posed -- which are all great questions, too --I wouldn't be taking advantage of the chance to offer much-needed information to a larger readership.<br /><br />As for the matter of working around the sexual pain - well the problem there is that pain is always a symptom of something else going on. It might be something as basic as not being turned on before intercourse, being dry, and feeling pain -- or it might be something like vaginismus (which is treatable), or another condition entirely that I can't assess via this letter. Whatever it is, it's best for her to find out, rather than make any assumptions. (I hope that's not being conservative!) <br /><br />At the same time, my answers are always in part a reflection of my general outlook on life, which by and large is "embrace change; learn, expand; try things a new way... take risks... and see what happens." (I know *that's* not conservative!) So when someone takes the time to write a letter like this, you can pretty much bet they aren't satisfied with the way things are, so I urge them to learn, dig deeper, and then see where they stand. Usually, when someone is open to sexuality at all, happy, pleasurable sex needs to be learned like any other skill or art. Great sex -even with a compatible and/or loving partner- is not always easy, nor does it usually come naturally. Being sexual in a truly positive and empowering way seems to require a great deal of information, awareness, and self-understanding. People who do come by it "naturally" are the lucky exceptions, I think, not the rule. <br /><br />Speaking of exceptions...<br /><br />Your comments about being demi-sexual are well worth more exploration. You know, if this were 1950, nobody would even blink at the idea that someone only feels sexual in a romantic relationship. Today that's considered a little...um...conservative;) But is it asexual? Generally, of course not-as you noted. But I think it depends on your starting point. I know women who are married to men who call themselves lesbian because that's how they identify, even though they are in a committed relationship that qualifies as an exception. In that light, maybe the asexual/demi-sexual concept is similar. One is baseline orientation, the other expresses the exceptional case. What's important is that you get to define who/what you are. <br /><br />I wrote this in a little bit of a rush, so if I was not clear about something, let me know. <br />Best, <br />JoyDr. Joy Davidsonhttp://www.joydavidson.comnoreply@blogger.com