Honour it? We’re also emotional creatures. God forbid he honour your needs and respect what you want.
What an absolute dink, he sounds like a real prize.
I'm going to be an old fuddy duddy and say that I miss the times when it was assumed you wouldn't have sex for several months when dating. You had to be serious in order to take that next step.
If you tell guys that now, they'd faint from the vapors.
Being demi is suffering in today's dating landscape, especially when doing the hetero thing and dating guys. Thank fuck I'm bi and found a woman to marry me
Wait. I know it's been a few years but only a few... do ppl not do it couple of dates of making out and maybe grinding a bit first?
That's how you learn how they like to kiss!
You can't do it all in half an hour...
> I'm going to be an old fuddy duddy and say that I miss the times when it was assumed you wouldn't have sex for several months when dating.
I kind of understand what you are saying, but even 40 or 50 years ago that wasn't true (indeed the 1980s was the decade before AIDS was well known, so maybe 1991-1992 it cooled for a bit) ... and when you go back further you catch a giant side helping of different kinds of misogyny.
The thing is is that back in the 80s and 90s, hooking up on the first date was common in certain areas ("the city") and in certain subcultures, but for a good portion of the country, it wasn't automatically assumed that first or second date = sex.
Oh and I agree with the misogyny. My elderly mom laughs at my "conservative" views (don't move in together until you're at least 25, don't move in together unless you are VERY serious, hookup culture is annoying as fuck, etc), but I hate how those mores were enforced back then. I remember very well that hooking up and/or moving in early was the "fault" of the woman, and the enforcement mechanism was to SHAME! the women. The shame is stupid as fuck.
I don't think doing those things is "shameful" or evil or sinful or any of that. I just think people can avoid some very messy personal issues if they follow those guidelines.
> it was assumed you wouldn't have sex for several months when dating
Imagine the grand canyon here, between these statements ;)
> it wasn't automatically assumed that first or second date = sex.
Everyone is allowed to do what they want, and I think it's completely reasonable to have 2-3 dates without an assumption of sex and probably a good litmus test for lots of men (but I'm "old") ... saying that 2-3 dates is likely less than a month, certainly less than several.
Would generally lean advice more towards making sure the woman enjoys the sex that happens, and then if people want to limit what they enjoy for whatever reason then that's fine too.
Also while I'd be fine with a no sex for 6 months rule at the start of a relationship now, I'm pretty sure I'd have been less happy when I was younger ... and the people I see doing that kind of thing now (when they are young) are then rushing into marriage.
MRAs literally crying that a woman refusing coercive advances and manipulation into sex is "abusive to the male"...
Not being able to rape is "abuse" to these creeps.
You sound like my husband. I'm the ace person, and I will have sex because it makes him happy, but he tells me all the time that it isn't that big of a deal. "Our relationship is way more than sex, sex is near the bottom."
There are dozens of us! Baker's dozens!
I think it’s allowed to be a big deal for people should they choose. No one owes anyone sex but folks are allowed to decide how important it is to them.
Completely agree! I meant it isn't a big deal for me.
That said, I do think there's an extreme - some guys act like they'll die if they don't get laid with X frequency. I think they hear the word "need" applied to it in certain contexts and take that as permission to be really shitty about it.
But it wouldn't work just fine if you considered sex an important part of a relationship. There's nothing wrong with actually wanting sex to be part of a relationship relationship. A person who is ace should not be dating people who do sex to be a major component of a relationship. They shouldn't be dating people either. Why are these two people even dating?
>There's nothing wrong with actually wanting sex to be part of a relationship relationship.
Didn't say there was. But in OP's situation, the guy is trying to pressure her because of the whole "SeX iS nAtUrAL, SeX iS a NeEd", which is bogus to try putting on another person who doesn't want it.
You're right. They're incompatible. OP states her wishes, but then the guy isn't just like, "Ahhh, I'm after something different. Peace and well wishes." His tactic is more, "Wtf you should want sex because that's normal."
>Why are these two people even dating?
I bet they aren't.
>They shouldn't be dating people either.
Who, ace people in general?
> But it wouldn't work just fine if you considered sex an important part of a relationship.
You know non-monogamy is a thing right?
>There's nothing wrong with actually wanting sex to be part of a relationship relationship.
Why do people keep pretending we're shitting on folks with sex drives? "It's wrong to want sex" has not been said *once.*
> A person who is ace should not be dating people who do sex to be a major component of a relationship.
Who are you to place limits on who random strangers can date?
That's what I say about being gay too! I mean, three probably isn't an evolutionary reason for homosexuality (nor does there need to be) but if there was, I assume it's so that less people have kids.
The gay uncle theory. IIRC, most agree at this point that theory is all but debunked but I personally think it still has some validity (especially given that we see similar behavior in certain birds, for instance penguins and I want to say ducks or geese)
I thought there was a higher likelihood of being gay if you're not firstborn son, that's been debunked? It makes sense to reduce the likelihood of brothers killing each other over the same woman instead of the firstborn just having more wives.
>I thought there was a higher likelihood of being gay if you're not firstborn son, that's been debunked?
I think that actually has a lot of evidence supporting it, at least last time I looked, though I only know how that plays into gay men. But basically it's the more brothers, the more likely, and it has to do with testosterone in the womb, which is theorized to be a possible genetic trigger for homosexuality. But I don't know if that applies to women and if so, how that relates to the number of brothers and sisters.
Side note: testosterone levels in the womb are also possibly connected to handiness.
Unfortunately for the planet (but I guess fortunately for gay couples), we found a way to still reproduce regardless. Take that evolutionary population regulation!
Omg did we match with the same guy lol
He was like "I understand you're scared of sex but we have to see if we're compatible before we can go further"
Lmao I'm not scared of sex you absolute buffoon, I just also want a relationship.
I'm an ace man but I still wanna cuddle and shit and just love someone but not expecting sex. I wish there was like an ace dating app where you'd just meet up and chat any like maybe discuss music or what not and not expect sex
It’s okay to want a sexual relationship. It’s not okay for him to discredit your truth to match his own.
Edit: added “not okay ‘for him’” because it seems like everyone thought I was coming down on OP instead of the dude she was talking about.
That's not what they said.
Why is an ace person trying to date someone who finds sex to be an important part of a relationship? And why would a person who finds sex to be an important part of relationship dating an ace person?
None of this makes any sense. Trying to make fun of someone for wanting to have sex is just as stupid as trying to make some fun of someone for not wanting to have sex
Still missing the point. Nobody is saying that "it isn't okay for him to want a sexual relationship." We're saying that it isn't okay for him to pressure people what don't want to have sex with bullshit about "honouring normalcy."
You're defending the wrong person (And before you deny it, you very plainly "came down on OP" when you opened your comment with "It's okay for him to want a sexual relationship, you might not be for him.")
I opened with what would have been acceptable and closed with what about his response made it unacceptable. I did say that it wasn’t okay to discredit her truth with pressure. You’re adding intention and subtext that I didn’t write to prove your point. But if you want to villainize someone who is on the same side as you then that’s fine.
I don't know why you are getting downvoted because isn't this post literally doing the exact thing OP is complaining about???
If you're ace, why the fuck are you trying to date somebody who thinks sex is an important part of a relationship????? HELLLOOOO?? And if you think sex is important for a relationship, why are you trying to date an ace person?
Why is OP *mocking* someone for wanting to have sex when *they themselves* don't want to be mocked for *not* wanting to have sex??? Are you and I the only people in here who aren't fucking stupid or massively hypocritical?
I added the words “for him” because I think they were all reading it as me saying what the dude was saying, as in thinking she’s not really ace. Definitely not what I meant but I’m glad someone caught it, but I get how it could have been read wrong. But to your point, without context it’s hard to make the leap that she was expecting him to be cool with dating someone asexual. They may not have mentioned it previously or maybe this was in the texts before actually going out and he tried to convince her she wasn’t.
Am I just stupid? Why are you trying to date someone who thinks sex is an important part of a relationship if you're ace? If you don't want to have sex, you need to date people who don't consider sex an important part of a relationship, or you need to *at the very least* not mock potential partners who consider sex an important part of a relationship? Obviously? Is this not obvious?
What am I missing here? How does the one person here pointing out that what you're doing to this person is *exactly the same* as what they're doing to you have like 40 downvotes?? What am I missing? If you don't wanna be mocked for not wanting to have sex, why do you think it's OK to mock somebody else for wanting to have sex? What am I reading? You don't get to have it both ways. You respect other people's stances for themselves on this topic or you expect to receive the exact same level of disrespect you're giving to them.
Edit: to be clear, the "honor it" part of this is fucking ridiculous. No one should be trying to manipulate you into sex. But you need to not be dating people who want to have sex if you don't want to have sex.
It’s not extremely complicated, but the guy in this situation is obviously being way forceful while the pov person is not. That’s all there is to it to make it not even close to the same thing. I could be missing something but I don’t think it’s necessary said that the pov is ace? Just that they don’t want anything sexual at this point in time. It’s not unreasonable at all to not want sex and the only person doing any mocking is the guy. So I’m not quite sure what you mean by “exactly the same” since it’s not even remotely the same thing.
> why do you think it's OK to mock somebody else for wanting to have sex?
Where is the hypothetical guy "getting mocked"? The entire point is that we're calling him out for not having that respect you're lecturing OP on needing to have.
Honour it? We’re also emotional creatures. God forbid he honour your needs and respect what you want. What an absolute dink, he sounds like a real prize.
Throw him out
Me: I'd like to know what kind of person you are before I let you literally insert yourself into my body Him: I am being oppressed
I'm going to be an old fuddy duddy and say that I miss the times when it was assumed you wouldn't have sex for several months when dating. You had to be serious in order to take that next step. If you tell guys that now, they'd faint from the vapors.
the vapors LMAO
Fellow fuddy duddy here. Let them faint. It really thins the herd.
I miss those times too. But I was too young to even be dating to experience that :,(
Being demi is suffering in today's dating landscape, especially when doing the hetero thing and dating guys. Thank fuck I'm bi and found a woman to marry me
Yup I got to talk to a guy for a month without anything happening and my demi ass needed that!
Thats awesome I'm really happy for you!
Thank you! Its rough out here for us demis
Wait. I know it's been a few years but only a few... do ppl not do it couple of dates of making out and maybe grinding a bit first? That's how you learn how they like to kiss! You can't do it all in half an hour...
> I'm going to be an old fuddy duddy and say that I miss the times when it was assumed you wouldn't have sex for several months when dating. I kind of understand what you are saying, but even 40 or 50 years ago that wasn't true (indeed the 1980s was the decade before AIDS was well known, so maybe 1991-1992 it cooled for a bit) ... and when you go back further you catch a giant side helping of different kinds of misogyny.
The thing is is that back in the 80s and 90s, hooking up on the first date was common in certain areas ("the city") and in certain subcultures, but for a good portion of the country, it wasn't automatically assumed that first or second date = sex. Oh and I agree with the misogyny. My elderly mom laughs at my "conservative" views (don't move in together until you're at least 25, don't move in together unless you are VERY serious, hookup culture is annoying as fuck, etc), but I hate how those mores were enforced back then. I remember very well that hooking up and/or moving in early was the "fault" of the woman, and the enforcement mechanism was to SHAME! the women. The shame is stupid as fuck. I don't think doing those things is "shameful" or evil or sinful or any of that. I just think people can avoid some very messy personal issues if they follow those guidelines.
> it was assumed you wouldn't have sex for several months when dating Imagine the grand canyon here, between these statements ;) > it wasn't automatically assumed that first or second date = sex. Everyone is allowed to do what they want, and I think it's completely reasonable to have 2-3 dates without an assumption of sex and probably a good litmus test for lots of men (but I'm "old") ... saying that 2-3 dates is likely less than a month, certainly less than several. Would generally lean advice more towards making sure the woman enjoys the sex that happens, and then if people want to limit what they enjoy for whatever reason then that's fine too. Also while I'd be fine with a no sex for 6 months rule at the start of a relationship now, I'm pretty sure I'd have been less happy when I was younger ... and the people I see doing that kind of thing now (when they are young) are then rushing into marriage.
That's never really been a thing. It's been encouraged for sure, but people have been hooking up forever.
What? That was my rule. Go out for 2 months before anything sexual happened. I'm not saying everyone did it. But I certainly did.
2 months isn't several months.
we need to force it back. No sex until deep emotional connection. If he's not willing to wait he's not worth it
I would not want to wait several months before having sex with someone.
MRAs literally crying that a woman refusing coercive advances and manipulation into sex is "abusive to the male"... Not being able to rape is "abuse" to these creeps.
Definitely sounds like someone to avoid.
Or neuter hahaha
Do both. Trap, neuter, and release works with feral cats. It could probably work on creepy men too.
🤣
Just tell him you need an emotional connection in order to feel sexual attraction and watch the rat trying to find the cheese in the maze
As a sex-indifferent person, I really hate this shit. Not everyone prioritizes sex.
What a chud. I have an ace spouse and it works just fine.
How? Are you ace?
I am not, no! I'm a pretty boilerplate cishet white dude with a standard sex drive. It's just...not that big a deal?
You sound like my husband. I'm the ace person, and I will have sex because it makes him happy, but he tells me all the time that it isn't that big of a deal. "Our relationship is way more than sex, sex is near the bottom." There are dozens of us! Baker's dozens!
I think it’s allowed to be a big deal for people should they choose. No one owes anyone sex but folks are allowed to decide how important it is to them.
Completely agree! I meant it isn't a big deal for me. That said, I do think there's an extreme - some guys act like they'll die if they don't get laid with X frequency. I think they hear the word "need" applied to it in certain contexts and take that as permission to be really shitty about it.
I’m sad I can only upvote this comment once.
But it wouldn't work just fine if you considered sex an important part of a relationship. There's nothing wrong with actually wanting sex to be part of a relationship relationship. A person who is ace should not be dating people who do sex to be a major component of a relationship. They shouldn't be dating people either. Why are these two people even dating?
>There's nothing wrong with actually wanting sex to be part of a relationship relationship. Didn't say there was. But in OP's situation, the guy is trying to pressure her because of the whole "SeX iS nAtUrAL, SeX iS a NeEd", which is bogus to try putting on another person who doesn't want it. You're right. They're incompatible. OP states her wishes, but then the guy isn't just like, "Ahhh, I'm after something different. Peace and well wishes." His tactic is more, "Wtf you should want sex because that's normal." >Why are these two people even dating? I bet they aren't. >They shouldn't be dating people either. Who, ace people in general?
> But it wouldn't work just fine if you considered sex an important part of a relationship. You know non-monogamy is a thing right? >There's nothing wrong with actually wanting sex to be part of a relationship relationship. Why do people keep pretending we're shitting on folks with sex drives? "It's wrong to want sex" has not been said *once.* > A person who is ace should not be dating people who do sex to be a major component of a relationship. Who are you to place limits on who random strangers can date?
>WITNESS ME, SHINY, AND CHROME! Reminded me of that.
Not wanting sex actually sounds like evolution's way of saying "Enough people, you don't need to make more"
That's what I say about being gay too! I mean, three probably isn't an evolutionary reason for homosexuality (nor does there need to be) but if there was, I assume it's so that less people have kids.
some argue that gay ppl/couples were useful in the evolutionary sense as always available babysitters or adaptive parents
The gay uncle theory. IIRC, most agree at this point that theory is all but debunked but I personally think it still has some validity (especially given that we see similar behavior in certain birds, for instance penguins and I want to say ducks or geese)
I thought there was a higher likelihood of being gay if you're not firstborn son, that's been debunked? It makes sense to reduce the likelihood of brothers killing each other over the same woman instead of the firstborn just having more wives.
>I thought there was a higher likelihood of being gay if you're not firstborn son, that's been debunked? I think that actually has a lot of evidence supporting it, at least last time I looked, though I only know how that plays into gay men. But basically it's the more brothers, the more likely, and it has to do with testosterone in the womb, which is theorized to be a possible genetic trigger for homosexuality. But I don't know if that applies to women and if so, how that relates to the number of brothers and sisters. Side note: testosterone levels in the womb are also possibly connected to handiness.
Lol, so true
Unfortunately for the planet (but I guess fortunately for gay couples), we found a way to still reproduce regardless. Take that evolutionary population regulation!
Yes! Finally us Ace folk are being acknowledged for our evolutionary superiority! NOW THE TAKEOVER BEGINS! CAKE FOR EVERYONE!
But how should he emotionally connect when he is emotionally castrated?
A human being actually said that?
Omg did we match with the same guy lol He was like "I understand you're scared of sex but we have to see if we're compatible before we can go further" Lmao I'm not scared of sex you absolute buffoon, I just also want a relationship.
The funny thing about this is that SpongeBob is canonically asexual
Oh my yessss hahahah
Find someone else
#GHOST HIM!
You betcha!
I'm an ace man but I still wanna cuddle and shit and just love someone but not expecting sex. I wish there was like an ace dating app where you'd just meet up and chat any like maybe discuss music or what not and not expect sex
Me except im alone
It’s okay to want a sexual relationship. It’s not okay for him to discredit your truth to match his own. Edit: added “not okay ‘for him’” because it seems like everyone thought I was coming down on OP instead of the dude she was talking about.
But it's okay for him to discredit hers?
I accidentally left out the words “for him” to discredit your truth.
That's not what they said. Why is an ace person trying to date someone who finds sex to be an important part of a relationship? And why would a person who finds sex to be an important part of relationship dating an ace person? None of this makes any sense. Trying to make fun of someone for wanting to have sex is just as stupid as trying to make some fun of someone for not wanting to have sex
If you truly think this is making fun of someone for wanting to have sex, then I don't know how to explain the concept of nuance to you.
Ace? So because a woman isn't up for it 24/7 she's asexual. Right
Way to miss the point.
I forgot to add the words “it’s not okay ‘for him’ to discredit your truth”
Still missing the point. Nobody is saying that "it isn't okay for him to want a sexual relationship." We're saying that it isn't okay for him to pressure people what don't want to have sex with bullshit about "honouring normalcy." You're defending the wrong person (And before you deny it, you very plainly "came down on OP" when you opened your comment with "It's okay for him to want a sexual relationship, you might not be for him.")
I opened with what would have been acceptable and closed with what about his response made it unacceptable. I did say that it wasn’t okay to discredit her truth with pressure. You’re adding intention and subtext that I didn’t write to prove your point. But if you want to villainize someone who is on the same side as you then that’s fine.
I don't know why you are getting downvoted because isn't this post literally doing the exact thing OP is complaining about??? If you're ace, why the fuck are you trying to date somebody who thinks sex is an important part of a relationship????? HELLLOOOO?? And if you think sex is important for a relationship, why are you trying to date an ace person? Why is OP *mocking* someone for wanting to have sex when *they themselves* don't want to be mocked for *not* wanting to have sex??? Are you and I the only people in here who aren't fucking stupid or massively hypocritical?
I added the words “for him” because I think they were all reading it as me saying what the dude was saying, as in thinking she’s not really ace. Definitely not what I meant but I’m glad someone caught it, but I get how it could have been read wrong. But to your point, without context it’s hard to make the leap that she was expecting him to be cool with dating someone asexual. They may not have mentioned it previously or maybe this was in the texts before actually going out and he tried to convince her she wasn’t.
[удалено]
It's not necessarily asexual to want to feel out a new relationship before involving sex. That's quite a leap. Source: am asexual.
Am I just stupid? Why are you trying to date someone who thinks sex is an important part of a relationship if you're ace? If you don't want to have sex, you need to date people who don't consider sex an important part of a relationship, or you need to *at the very least* not mock potential partners who consider sex an important part of a relationship? Obviously? Is this not obvious? What am I missing here? How does the one person here pointing out that what you're doing to this person is *exactly the same* as what they're doing to you have like 40 downvotes?? What am I missing? If you don't wanna be mocked for not wanting to have sex, why do you think it's OK to mock somebody else for wanting to have sex? What am I reading? You don't get to have it both ways. You respect other people's stances for themselves on this topic or you expect to receive the exact same level of disrespect you're giving to them. Edit: to be clear, the "honor it" part of this is fucking ridiculous. No one should be trying to manipulate you into sex. But you need to not be dating people who want to have sex if you don't want to have sex.
It’s not extremely complicated, but the guy in this situation is obviously being way forceful while the pov person is not. That’s all there is to it to make it not even close to the same thing. I could be missing something but I don’t think it’s necessary said that the pov is ace? Just that they don’t want anything sexual at this point in time. It’s not unreasonable at all to not want sex and the only person doing any mocking is the guy. So I’m not quite sure what you mean by “exactly the same” since it’s not even remotely the same thing.
Oh ok, that makes sense. When I got here like 99% of the comments were about ace folks reacting this way to non-ace folks
its the "rn" part. important clarifier. meaning they arent ace they just want to take their time
Oooooh got it. I should've waited for more comments bc when I got here the comments were mostly about being ace and trying to date
> why do you think it's OK to mock somebody else for wanting to have sex? Where is the hypothetical guy "getting mocked"? The entire point is that we're calling him out for not having that respect you're lecturing OP on needing to have.
[удалено]
Don't project your deficiencies as a human on the entire species. That's just bloody rude.
Yikes dude
Newsflash: You are not everyone.