A
male
age
41-50,
*otsoEasyCharles
writes:This question may seem long and convoluted but there is an underlying unity I can absolutely assure you if you just take the time to read between the lines and try to see how things might look from my perspective.I hope you can see when a disagreement arises out of semantic difference or from arbitrary cultural constructs rather than a substantive difference in thinking.My question is about whether or not a person can be sympathetic in any sense of the term to a person who has not for whatever reason been able to experience their sexuality to a satisfactory degree.I was having a long conversation on an web forum called wrongplanet.net which is for people who have been diagnosed with disabilities such as autism, aspergers and PDD-NOS, and I have received such a diagnosis. In that discussion I was arguing that people should be sympathetic to the unfulfilled sexual desires of people with such a disability, whereas most other people responding to me told me that I should not in fact receive such sympathy. However in an email discussion that I had with one of those persons, she told me that she was sympathetic toward me, which confused me because I had thought that my entire discussion with her was her telling me how I shouldn't have sympathy of any kind. But what she told me that she was actually arguing was that I wasn't "owed" sympathy but that she was giving it to me anyway. Now that is interesting because I had been using the word sympathy to mean a simple recognition of the wrongness of a persons situation, in the abstract. I think, but I am not certain, that she had thought the conversation was about how I felt I was "owed" sympathy in the sense of a strong emotional response toward me.Some people say they can't be sympathetic to me because their are more important things in this world, and their are many people who have things far worse off than not having sex. Well, the difficulty I have with understanding that position is their are so many things that contradict that way of looking at things. I saw a PBS documentary about people with disabilities. Maybe I am wrong but perhaps the fact that he was in a wheelchair made it all the more important for him to experience the satisfaction of sex. I suspect that I am not the only person who thinks about the lack of sex life of person's with disabilities. In fact I feel intuitively that one the reasons that people with disabilities are considered an untouchable class has to do with the fact that they are deprived of their sexuality. Is that a correct insight? Or is it a paranoid condemnation of social hypocrisy that doesn't exist?Some people point out that there is no reason to feel sympathetic because prostitution exists as an available sexual outlet. My experience with a prostitute was not especially satisfying, although I know I should not make a generalization based on one experience. STDs and feeling uncomfortable of the possibility of participating in what might be thought of an objectifying practice also make. I bring that up in order to suggest that it might on top of that consideration I have never heard of anybody saying that prostitution should be available because of the benefit it might give to society. Furthermore for prostitution to be a full substitute for sex it shouldn't be stigmatized, and it certainly is. Prostitution might be a very good replacement for sex for many people but i don't think that it is for me because of the reasons I have given, and because while I don't know it for sure I feel that I can get a lot more out of sex than what I can get from a prostitute.And while I have not tried as hard as I can to find a person on Craigslist as I should that may be due to a sense of discouragement and also because I'm not sure what I can get out of that kind of encounter. Just because I have shyness and other failings besides my primary disability doesn't mean in my opinion that people shouldn't be able to recognize the wrongness of my situation IMO.I have asked people if they can think of things nearly as good as sex and if they would care about their friends desire to have those things and they said that they would care about those things. I then asked why they wouldn't care about whether their friend desired sex and they couldn't attain that and they said that they didn't care because it wasn't their "business." that it was a "private matter." Now if by caring they mean an ability to "feel" that person's situation then in some ways then it does make sense somewhat to not care for that friend's sexual fulfillment, but if by caring all that is meant is a recognition of the wrongness of a persons situation then I can't for the life of me see how it it being "nobodies business" and it being a "private matter" invalidates the awareness that what is taking place in that person's life is a deficient in satisfaction.That's what I feel like and what I really wish would change in our society. I feel like my sexual desires are somehow considered less valid and legitimate desires than other desires simply because they are "private" or "nobodies business." Is this feeling correct or does it stem from a misunderstanding of the way people use words such as "care" and "sympathy."?Another difficulty in communication with others was the belief by some that by asking for sympathy that I then felt that people "owed" me sex. The implicit message being that this was tantamount to objectification, "sympathy sex" or even justifying rape. Well, what I want is a mutual and consensual interaction and I find discomfort in the idea of objectifying others. But let me point out, if only to point out a possible contradiction, that many spouses believe their spouse is obligated to have sex with them even when they don't really feel like it and many spouses feel that they ought to comply with that obligation. Some people say that they are confused by my plea for sympathy in sexual matters because of my desire to have a meaningful and lasting relationship with a women. They say you are contradiction yourself by saying you want both so much, you should focus on one or the other they say. They say that they can sympathize with my desire to have a romantic partner just not my desire for sexual fulfillment. While that seems like it makes sense in some ways it doesn't make sense in other ways. What if a person don't want intimacy and what if its relatively easier to find a more casual relationship, so that even if you wanted a long term romantic partner you would want a more casual partner as well? I think that any relationship that is based on mutual respect for the other person and their sexual desires is an acceptable relationship.I wish that I could just trust people so that when people say they are indifferent to the sexual fulfillment of others I would feel that they have a good reason for being that way. I admit I have a very paranoid sense of how society works and it feels like people are cold, irrational, arbitrary, and insensitive, the fact that people are overtly insensitive about sexual matters simply confuses me to no end. Is it possible that people have been misunderstood me to such a degree that they are not telling me something that I need to hear? I keep thinking that if somebody could finally just say the right things about this sexual issue that I would finally have some sense of peace and I would be able to trust others more, which is why I am asking this question
View related questions:
my ex, prostitute, sex life, shy, std Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (3 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionI am not stigmatizing anybody. There are virtually no books on those with Asperger's mention that mention sexuality. Apparently that is because professionals don't think that helping those with this disability achieve their sexuality is a very important goal. I don't want to get into an argument.
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (3 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionI am not stigmatizing anybody. There are virtually no books on those with Asperger's mention that mention sexuality. Apparently that is because professionals don't think that helping those with this disability achieve their sexuality is a very important goal. I don't want to get into an argument.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (3 August 2010): No one should be sympathetic to your situation...perhaps empathetic, but not sympathetic.
You'll earn sympathy once you cease moping.
You're only stigmatizing all who share your (or a similar) diagnosis.
You are more than a 'disability.' I have severe ADHD and found a profound love for (and great sex with) a like-brained individual. Perhaps you could find what you seek by courting equally like-minded spectrummy folk?
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (3 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionAnonymous, I wish you had read the entire thing. I agree that a relationship is even better, but its kind of a different question.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (3 August 2010): No offense, but I didn't read this whole thing... the way you word things was making it hard for me to understand. Basically, I have a disability- one that includes difficulty with to achieve reading comprehension as easily for others. I will keep it short... I don't have a problem getting sex. And not by other outlets such as prostitutes or craigslist because I have morals. I do get sex from friends and while it leaves me satisfied- and them very satisfied, my only problem is getting a long term committing relationship.
What is more important than sex? How bout just a relationship? An intimate relationship? Of course including sex, but feeling of closeness, being wanted, and loved.
Education? Anybody with a disability should know the battles they had to fight with their school to put in the right accommodations. Whether you were brilliant or not, something was lacking in the education department that didn't allow you to receive the resources to tap into your brilliancy or simply learn! And without education... what do you have?
Dependency. Lack of social life. Lack of intimate relationships. Lack of self expression.
I don't think I answered your question or found a disagreement but those were the only thoughts that came to mind and like I said, sorry I didn't read your entire entry... I'm sure someone here will and will have a great rebuttal for your debate!
...............................
|
