saucefactory:
So, after that post I made about turn-ons? I got asked how I could even have turn-ons if I’m an asexual. I’d like to point out that asexuals can have turn-ons, too. Not only romantic, platonic or mental turn-ons, but sexual turn-ons, too. Yes. Asexuals can have sexual turn-ons. It’s just that they don’t lead to an actual desire to have sex, in my case, but I still find some things titillating.
Asexuals, like—er, sexuals?—often belong somewhere on a spectrum, except that in our case, the spectrum goes from desire to non-desire, and includes different types of desire, from the sexual to the non-sexual. An ace who is demisexual may be entirely capable of sexual arousal and interested in the physical act of sex, but only with someone they have deep feelings for. An ace who is autosexual may have many sexual turn-ons, but may not be interested in sex with another person, preferring to masturbate whenever they do want to experience sexual arousal or a physical orgasm. An ace who is autchorissexual may be interested in all things sexual, without wanting to engage in sexual activity.
Even an ace like me, who has never wanted to have sex with anyone for sexual reasons, can occasionally experience sexual excitement without engaging in sex, and may be interested in sex for non-sexual reasons. (Since I don’t actually respond sexually to sex. Contradictory as that sounds.) There’s a sense of emotional intimacy that sometimes comes with sex that appeals to asexuals like me, even if the sexual intimacy itself doesn’t. Romantic tenderness can be a big plus, for those of us with that particular romantic need.
Of course, an aromantic person may or may not have that need, while still having other sexual or emotional needs. For an aromantic, romantic attraction can still exist, just like for an asexual, sexual attraction can still exist. It may just exist differently, on a spectrum, similar to the spectrum of sexual desire I described above. An aromantic may have romantic turn-ons, just as an asexual may have sexual turn-ons.
A demiromantic may have romantic feelings in certain situations or towards certain people, but may not be capable of romantic attraction most of the time. There might even be an aromantic person who feels romantic attraction just as much as a so-called romantic person, but absolutely doesn’t want romance or romantic relationships. A homoromantic may be uninterested in romance with someone of the opposite sex and/or gender, whereas a biromantic or panromantic may have a different preference. Et cetera, et cetera.
There is endless variety in aromanticism, just as there is in asexuality. The two may even overlap—again, in multiple combinations. For instance, you may meet a panromantic autochorissexual (like myself), or a biromantic demisexual, or a pansexual aromantic, or a heteroromantic bisexual, or a panromantic homosexual. It’s all okay. It’s all equally “normal.” Gender identity may also figure into a person’s identity as an aromantic or an asexual. There is endless variety in endless permutations. And it’s all wonderful!
Anyway, to get back to the topic that originally inspired this post—yes, asexuals can have sexual turn-ons. We can even have non-sexual turn-ons during sex. I, for example, enjoy seeing my partner vulnerable and open and… well, at my mercy, frankly. Which brings us neatly to the topic of kinks like BDSM.
You can, in fact, meet asexuals who are into BDSM, or into any other type of kink, sexually or non-sexually. While I am no longer an active member of the BDSM community, I am into BDSM. I always was. It works for me sexually inside my own mind, if that makes sense, and non-sexually in other contexts. I’ve been in 24/7 relationships that really worked for me from an emotional, mental and psychological standpoint, even if they didn’t necessarily do anything for me sexually. Conversely, sometimes, I would find the concept of a specific type of scene intensely sexually stimulating, even if the scene itself had nothing to do with sex.
BDSM was very enlightening for me, in that it introduced me to the concepts of sexual and non-sexual desire as being perfectly natural responses to different stimuli and/or people. In one relationship, my (extremely sexual) partner got off on activities that would generally be perceived as non-sexual (and not just by me, an asexual!). Having me order her around for simple domestic tasks really, really worked for her, and after a day of following non-sexual orders, she was often in this wonderful, malleable, molten state of nigh-unbearable sexual arousal, after which I brought her to orgasm using methods that worked sexually for her, and non-sexually for me. Basically, we both got something out of it, and were both deeply satisfied by our relationship.
Being an asexual does not mean that one cannot sexually satisfy a partner! Or harbor sexual desires, tastes and preferences! Nor does it mean that the asexual themselves has to be unsatisfied or unhappy in a sexual relationship. That can be the case, but it need not be. Some asexuals never want to have sex; some only want to have sex with some people in some situations; and some may be as generally interested in sex as someone who identifies as “sexual,” even if their interest in the sex act itself might be non-sexual… or sexual.
Some asexuals may never be sexually aroused, while some might be capable of sexual arousal but not of sexual release, while some might be capable of both but uninterested in them, while yet others might be capable of both and interested in them. Like I said, there is endless variety, and there is definitely someone (or several someones?) out there for you, even if you haven’t found them, yet.
Now, people might say, “But an aromantic person doesn’t need or want a romantic relationship!” Wrong. Some aromantics genuinely do not want anything remotely romantic, with anyone, but there are plenty of aromantic people who get non-romantic satisfaction out of relationships that are romantic to their partners, just like I got non-sexual satisfaction out of relationships that were sexual for my partners. There are also aromantic people who, as I said above, may experience some form of romantic attraction without wanting to be in a romantic relationship, or vice-versa.
There is an aromantic friend of mine who has been happily married for fifteen years, and whose partner harbors very strong romantic feelings for him, even if he (the aromantic partner) doesn’t love her romantically. The aromantic still feels just as strongly for his partner in a familial and platonic way, and could never stand to be parted from her. They’ve gone through pretty much everything together—going to college, finding jobs, raising kids, attending social functions, filing taxes, the works. They’re closer to each other than they are to anybody else. They know each other better than they know anybody else. And neither wants to live without the other. That is just one example of a couple whose relationship has succeeded spectacularly for them both, even if they harbor different types of sexual/romantic feelings for each other. It’s great to see.
Love does not have to be romantic, just as desire does not have to be sexual. Moreover, the two can coexist in infinite permutations. If we can truly understand this as a society, perhaps we can begin removing the stigma that is unfairly attached to aromantics and asexuals. We aces and aros are just as capable of fulfilling our partners in the ways that are important to them, and our rights and desires (or non-desires) are just as important as those of our partners. There should be no force, sexual or emotional, either way. Compromise is key.
The truth is that every relationship is about compromise, mutual affection and mutual respect. Sexual/romantic compromises are no worse than any other kind, and indeed, already exist in many relationships that are perceived as “conventionally” sexual/romantic.
Think back to the last sexually and romantically involved couple/triad/group you met, that had been together for a while, and ask yourself if they could’ve made it that long without compromising on some aspect of their sexual or romantic needs. I know for a fact that my aunt was never very romantically satisfied in her relationship with her husband, but was sexually satisfied and also satisfied in other ways that were important to her—important enough that she cherished and valued that relationship above all others.
Similarly, an asexual or an aromantic will be no different in any relationship of theirs. They will not be “bad” partners simply by virtue of being asexual or aromantic. There are always varying levels of sex drives and romantic drives, as well as other drives. No two (or three, or more) individuals have exactly the same needs out of their relationship. There is no relationship on earth between partners who are identical in every way. Compromise is inevitable—and healthy, and essential.
For some people, factors like material stability and sexual monogamy are more important in relationships than romantic interaction or parenthood, while for some, raising a family and getting emotional satisfaction out of that is more important than romance or sexual fulfillment, while for others, sexual fulfillment is the prime factor and monogamy or material security are not even minor concerns. All needs are valid, so long as they are non-abusive, and all needs deserve to respected. Whether they’re sexual or romantic or neither or both.
Being in a relationship with an asexual or an aromantic is no different, in terms of compromise, happiness and satisfaction, than being in a relationship with anyone else.
And that’s what I have to say on the issue. Thank you for reading!