I was in a long-term relationship that fell apart partially because I was ace and my partner was very much not, and every time we looked for relationship help we got told that I was the problem. Not just that a significant mismatch in sexual desire could be a problem in a relationship, but that it was My Fault, Specifically, for not being willing to suck it up and have a bunch of sex I didn't want. To my ex's credit, he cared about consent much more than any of the professionals we talked to and refused to pressure me even when my (lesbian, billed as progressive and pro-LGBT) therapist was actively telling him to.
But it meant that we had absolutely no help or support when we were trying to work on the relationship in ways that *did* value my autonomy. There's basically no advice for people who want to try to make a relationship where there's a big desire gap work that isn't "well you should just have sex anyway" or "just break up lol". And that sucks!
Sometimes breaking up is necessary, and that's what ended up happening with us because there were other reasons we worked better as friends, but there *should* be better frameworks for discussing what people want and need that don't automatically assume that one partner's feelings are automatically more important or valuable than the other's.
I was dating someone who wanted to be accommodating and work with me to figure things out but lacked the EQ to do so in any effective way. It was my first relationship and I was still figuring out what being ace meant for me. It’s been eight or nine years, but I still remember very clearly the moment I realized we’d been approaching the entire discussion as if my orientation was the problem to be solved, and that it would be equally as valid to say that hers was.
She was significantly less impressed with this revelation than I was, but I tried to hold on to it ever since (although obviously the real problem wasn’t either one of us, but the mismatch and the lack of tools to deal with it). I think it’s super important to remember that we aren’t the ones in the wrong while our theoretical partners are the ones in the right. I was surprised by how much I’d internalized the assumption and I don’t think I’m the only one.
The other frustrating aspect of this is allo relationships will often have periods of time where libido does not match (I'm not derailing and this will swing back to asexual people)
Just after giving birth, during a family crisis, during a mental health episode, during health problems, during stressful periods at work
There are a lot of times when one person is horned up and raring to go and the other has no interest
And the solution often presented is that the person who is going through something should just put out because they are the problem instead of like...finding ways to engage in non sexual intimacy to reaffirm closeness
An asexual person is going to get 10x the amount of pressure and blame put on them and no advice on how non-sexual intimacy can help their relationships and if they get that at all it will only be to sell it as a bridge to sex they don't want.
I really hate the selling of intimacy as only equaling or facilitating sex. Intimacy comes in many forms and should be explored more by every couple as a non sexual act. And it the given importance it deserves. In fact I would argue if we as a society put more value on non sexual intimacy more relationships would be happier and healthier
And asexual people would stop getting shit for being themselves.
Yeah, exactly! There are many different forms of intimacy, physical and emotional, and we need to stop viewing non-sexual forms of intimacy as inherently lesser.
And also you're right that while this post is specifically about the asexual experience, these problems affect everyone; desire gaps, whether temporary/circumstantial or ongoing, affect many if not most long-term relationships. And the solution needs to reaffirm bodily autonomy and compassion for everyone, not just carve out a specific exception for ace people. Too frequently I see people and institutions that, even when they're attempting to be affirming, essentially say "Well this is what a committed relationship Needs To Look Like . . . unless you already id as ace I guess" instead of allowing their general idea of what relationships can look like to expand and become less prescriptive.
No one should be pressured into sex they don't want. This should be a basic and non-negotiable tenet of feminism. But it goes out the window as soon as it's in the context of a committed relationship that isn't otherwise abusive.
What the hell... I had no idea the one who doesn't want to have sex is still pressured to put out even if they're going through something- stress, health problems, after giving birth, what the hell!!!! Like actually why is sex seen as that important that it should override even things like that???? Honestly what's even the appeal of sex if your partner isn't consenting
Here's the solution I'd propose if I were the therapist in that situation. It won't work for everyone, but polyamory exists. Obviously OP felt committed enough to this person that they still stayed in each other's lives when they're 'just' friends. So the way I see it is like, even if you personally have never considered polyamory, if you're dedicated to a person enough, you can let things like that slide, and that way everyone gets their needs met
Honestly. There is no way in hell that one person, and only one person, is capable of being there for you physically, emotionally, sexually, romantically and otherwise all of the time. There are some things your partner may not be able to do for you that other people can. And honestly. If there's a need you have that must be fulfilled, and there's a person who's capable and willing to fulfill it for you....I don't see the problem
Literally as long as anything is safe, sane and consensual, what is the problem....
Hi! I only just saw this addition and I really don't want it circulating without a rebuttal, so please listen to me when I say: suggesting polyamory as The Solution to a situation like this is just as aphobic and insulting as suggesting that ace people suck it up and have sex anyway. Many ace people have been coerced into polyamory/open relationships that they do not want because of this attitude. It continues to present the desire for sex as a non-negotiable need that MUST be met while ignoring the ace partner's needs and desires.
Not everyone is interested in polyamory. Telling ace people that they "must" be okay with it if they're not interested in sex, is, frankly, fucked up.
Oh god <.< I hope everyone who saw my response will see this addition too 🤔 I think polyamory is definitely important to at least bring up in a conversation like this but no, it's not the end all be all- I think I did word it like it was The Perfect Solution? My bad bro 💀
I think how I'd amend that would be that I think the frameworks of relationships that we have are just way too reductive (the assumption that the ace person must bend to the need for sex, etc), and at least for me, some kind of relationship anarchy type of deal is a lot more fitting
Thank you for listening! I absolutely agree that a discussion of relationship anarchy is important in situations like this, but that also includes things like "interrogating how much the allo person's desire for sex in a relationship is genuine vs how much of it is that they've internalized the societal message that they're a failure if their partner doesn't find them attractive." Often the suggestion that aces try polyamory doesn't come from a place of truly valuing relationship anarchy and the personal choice to pursue non-normative relationships, but as a way of replacing one prescriptive relationship model with another.
