NewEdit617

Steve -- that's what all my friends say, too. It's more powerful to hear from a "stranger" in that you don't have a biased view of me. The issue is of some concern to me independent of who the particular boyfriend is, though, as asexuality would be a potential source of conflict in any romantic relationship. Z -- My understanding is that, among asexuals, there is a range of toleration. Some do not want any physical contact. I enjoy hugging, kissing, and some touching, which I consider romantic and intimate acts. I can see where, definition-wise, asexual should mean "neutral" or "ambivalent"-- and it does. But because the act is so personal and so invasive, one can not feel neutral about engaging in it. In other words, abstractly, I am neutral about sex-- and because I do not see the point of it, I do not value it. If I do not value it, I view it as an imposition on my time because it prevents me from working on things I do value. Add to that the personal/invasive nature, and it becomes a traumatic anti-value. Does that make sense? Novis -- "I must say that I am highly convinced by the idea that if one has no hormonal problems, then their asexuality must be the result of psychological problems or unadmitted homosexuality." I suppose I cannot fault your for this belief, because asexuality is not understood and not talked about much... but that is not the case. Of all the asexuals I've met (which is online, admittedly), most of them have had their hormones checked and had normal results, they seem smart, creative, happy, etc. (not psychologically screwed up). And I am certain I am not homosexual, as I do feel attracted to men and not to women. I just do not have the desire for intercourse. I can also sympathize (or try to) with your idea that our relationship is just a best friend relationship. In my mind it is significantly different. There is a romantic/intimate bond that is not present with best friends. I do not hug and kiss my best friends, nor am I physically attracted to them, nor do I feel that essential emotional connection. All of the aspects of a love/romantic relationship are present (except intercourse, if such is necessary for a love relationship).

JASKN, But what is really going on here is that he continued to make advances despite me crying and having emotional meltdowns, telling him I feel "invaded," and telling him at least five to ten times over the course of two years that the pressure to have sex was more than I could handle and I saw no course of action but for him to back off or for us to break up. (Yes, I am clearly morally at fault for this-- for continuing to engage in something I hated. In my "defense," if any is possible, I cared about his happiness enough to try doing what he wanted, though, immorally, it was at the expense of my own happiness. I also wanted to be absolutely certain that I wasn't immoral or otherwise psychologically screwed up-- for if I was, asexuality would be my fault, and I should not punish him for my flaws that I should instead work on overcoming.) So, now that I think about it, I don't think it is "reasonable" for him to expect me to "get over it." I have made it clear how much I dislike it and how much his advances and pressures to have sex distress me.

Woah, so many things to respond to here! I apologize if I miss anything. To those who have asked, no, I have not had my hormone levels checked. However, I posed that question in a forum of asexuals. Most of the people there had had endocrine tests, and nothing showed up abnormally. (Of course, I cannot speculate on their psychological or philosophical health.) Current scientific research points to sexuality not being associated with one's current hormonal levels, but to biochemical activity that occurred at the embryonic stage, though. Eiuol and JayR, I have found your responses particularly illuminating and helpful. Dante, that is an interesting thought on choosing the value of your girlfriend's happiness over competing values. The distinction here is that you would be doing something she likes that is neutral to you. Engaging in intercourse is something I dislike, so doing it for the sake of my boyfriend's happiness would be self-sacrifice. JASKN: "Assuming that asexuality (complete lack of sexual desire) is an actual, legitimate human phenomenon, that sexual desire can actually be lacking from someone's person, then that kind of relationship is not only not a value, but impossible." I will ponder this. It makes good sense on a first read. Dante, I like this also: "I know Objectivism has a particular theory of sex as the physical expression of valuation of another person, but I don't see why sex is necessarily the only or primary physical expression of valuation. For most people it is, because of their sex drive, but if you don't have one, then I don't see how you could expect yourself to see sex as an expression of value." That is helpful for me to think about. Actually, that entire comment has made me feel a little better (in the sense of not accepting an unearned guilt). And CapitalistSwine, thank you also for your thorough response and suggestions. I hold a strong distrust for psychologists and psychiatrists alike, though. Even the "good" ones have their own agendas. What I dislike is the idea that asexuality is rooted in some kind of psychological evasion, repression, or "emotion-blocking." I sincerely expect a psychiatrist to tell me I need 20 years of therapy to diagnose some deep-seated trauma that happened when I was 2 months old. Your point about not feeling guilty I will try to take to heart (mind). I've been feeling that a lot lately, which is only increasing the problem and my resentment. It is very helpful to read that many of you do not think there is immorality or malevolent universe premise causing this asexuality. Thank you for all of the thoughtful comments.

Hi whyNOT, and thank you for your response. I didn't include you in the previous comment because we must have been writing at the same time! You're right about self-fulfilling prophecies, but I truly do not believe that is what is going on here. I have tried to be sexual (explained in prior comment) and have wanted to be for the sake of my boyfriend, but it still has not happened. Haven't you, not for a single second in the past, way back to puberty, felt sexual desire? No. I feel romantic and intimate desire, absolutely. I want to be emotionally close to someone and share the deepest parts of my psyche with him... a sort of "mental sex" would be a good way of describing it... but it's not a physical desire. Have you aspired to getting married in the future? No, I never saw that as part of my life plan. When I met my boyfriend I wasn't seeking a relationship, but I admired him and his values so the relationship "happened" from there. But I've always been happy alone doing my own things and working on my own projects. There is nothing better than waking up in my own bed in my own house to greet the day that is mine alone. Do you imagine having a child? Never wanted children; prefer focusing on my career, side-business, hobbies, and friends. Would you be very happy with the idea of living for the forseeable future, outside of a conventional relationship, and being alone? Yes, this is what I always imagined. I never sought to have a boyfriend. Now that I do, it seems too strange to go back to being single... I won't know how and a huge part of my life will be lacking. But if I really allow myself to think about my deepest values... they do involve me being alone (mostly because I haven't found a way to reconcile pursuing all my interests with having enough time for another person). Do you believe yourself to be capable of romantic love? In fact, I think I am a lot more intimate than many sexual people are. I constantly want to share my deepest values with another person, and feel emotional closeness on a romantic level (as opposed to a friendship level). I want a male companion who loves me, and I him... I just express romantic love more emotionally rather than physically. Why continue with your boyfriend, seeing the pain it causes you both? This is a very valid question... I wrote over 30 pages trying to figure it out on my private journal! ;-) I think the main reason is that I keep questioning whether there is just something psychologically or morally wrong with me, that, if corrected, would make me have a normal sex drive. All the evidence I experience tells me that is not the case-- I am genuinely and honestly asexual and I am genuinely OK with that. But I do not want to risk losing a good man if there is even the slightest chance that it is *my* philosophy or *my* premises that need correcting. I want to be absolutely sure that I am OK or morally "allowed" to be asexual, before I stop trying to change myself in that sense. Thank you for your comments about my sense of life. Although this is an internet message board and we do not know each other, I really appreciate your recognition. "Your ongoing and obvious happiness and self-esteem are all that's important." Thank you also for that reminder. :-)

Hi everyone, I appreciate your responses. The main question can be summed up as: "does objectivism hold that it is immoral to be asexual?" As I'll describe below, I have tried the suggestions people presented, yet I still do not feel a sex drive. I want to know if it is morally OK for me to just pursue my rational passions without being in a sexual relationship, or does asexuality necessarily mean I hold bad premises that need straightening? I know I would be a lot happier without feeling like I "should" have sex, and the only reason I feel like I "should" have sex is because sex is allegedly an expression of one's highest values. So when I do not feel sexual, I worry that I might be guilt of some moral transgression that is preventing me from living a full objectivist life-- even though that statement seems contrary to how I feel about myself. aequalsa - I've made it quite clear to my BF, and we talk about it very frequently. You are right about the evasion. He does not "get it" and keeps trying, in the hopes that I will be "comfortable enough" (his words) for real sex, or in the hopes that I will come to like it. I have told him time and again that that may never happen. It is a huge source of stress for me, too, as I feel guilty for being unable to give someone I love what he wants. Things can't go on like this much longer. Maximus - I have tried. I've done clothes off, partial penetration, oral, and way more than I am comfortable with, etc. We do this every week and I still dislike and resent it every time. It feels like a terrible duty... something that I am "supposed" to like rather than something I actually enjoy. Capitalist - see above comment to Maximus (I have tried). While I believe you that masturbation and sex are different, my reason for mentioning it was to show that I've never had the desire for sexual exploration of any kind. If asexuality is a psychological manifestation, do you have any ideas for what the psychological flaw could be? If it is hormonal (and it may well be), does that mean I *should* correct it with medicine? In other words, would it be morally unacceptable to not take the medicine and remain asexual?

Hi everyone, I'm 27, successful in my career, excited about my interests, generally happy with my self and my life, and asexual. By this I mean I'm not interested in sex. Starting in adolescence I was attracted to members of the opposite sex, but I never felt a desire for intercourse itself. I never think about it, I have never masturbated, and I have no interest in doing so. Despite being told that I am attractive and interesting, and having multiple men express interest in dating me, I did not agree to have a boyfriend until I was 25. I was attracted to his values and seeming shared passion and enthusiasm for life. Despite finding my boyfriend attractive and despite admiring his values, I still have no desire for sex after two years of dating. I enjoy emotional intimacy, kissing, and some touching, but I have zero interest in sex itself. It seems like it would be boring and a waste of time, and I'd rather be working on a personal project. I have not been able to bring myself to have actual sex with him. I resent his constant advances, and he is frustrated and disappointed by my lack of reciprocity. But my question is not about whether we are compatible-- it is on the objectivist view of asexuality. Asexuality is not commonly accepted as valid; the prevailing mainstream idea is that people who are not interested in sex are repressed abuse victims or closet homosexuals. I would think that the objectivist view would say that asexuals have some flawed premise-- perhaps a malevolent universe principle that prevents them from wanting to experience enjoyment? But I don't feel that. I have a rich and full life otherwise, and I honestly have just never felt a desire for sex. I only start to feel badly about my asexuality due to the problems it causes in the relationship. So I would like to know-- would the objectivist framework allow that it is possible to be asexual yet still mentally and philosophically healthy? If not, what faulty premise would be causing asexuality?

Thanks for letting us know! I will definitely be there. And now for an introduction, since I've never posted here! I've been an Objectivist for quite some time, but somehow, didn't know about this board until yesterday. I started the now-defunct Objectivist club at University of Western Ontario. When I moved back to Michigan, a few people and I almost had a Meetup.com group going, but that never took off. Grad school is taking up a lot of time now, so I can't dedicate the effort to forming an official Detroit-area group (though if there is one I would definitely join... the benefits of actually knowing other Objectivists in person are enormous.) Currently I'm taking classes from the ARI's OAC, and learning a lot from them. Anyways, the point of all of this is to ask if any of you are going to Dr. Brook's speech, and if so, we should be on the lookout for each other :-) Carrie