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.It was recently suggest to me that I am stigmatizing others with disabilities by appearing to . However the reality is that the overwhelming majority of books on the subject of those with Asperger's do not ever mention sexuality. You would almost think that this is simply not a priority among professionals. Which is what I am trying to articulate but I am doing a very poor job of doing that. There is more than just a lack of emotional "poor you" feeling, there is an indifference that in my opinion lacks justification. Sex is important and I think it ethically behooves professionals in this field to act as if it were.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 (8 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the question"Sigh.. sorry, I hope you understand my answer.. sex is not everrything, nobody NEEDS sex"
I don't know what you mean. You make it sound like everything and then you say it isn't.
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (8 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionMiamine Do you think its more important that I have a romantic partner than a casual sex partner? Why or why not?
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine  +, writes (7 August 2010):
 People with disabilities can need sex more than anyone else.. their lives can be so lonely, and there can be few chances to be held, kissed or loved by anyone....
That's why I support prostitution.. what would some disabled men do, if they didn't have them kind women to touch them and not reject them like everyone else does..
Sorry... hurts when I see old men (90 and over) they still got the sex drive, they still want to play, but nobody wants to play with them any more... that just dosen't seem fair....
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (7 August 2010):
Why should people have sexual satisfaction... wow.. very hard question.
It's a hard question because not everybody needs or like's sex at all.. There are nun's and monks who go without sex. There are people who are sworn to celibacy and they are happy enough. Many old people (mostly women) go off sex, they lack the desire I think as they get too old for such things. Many, many people can be happy without sex....
But...
Sex brings so much joy into the world. Even when you have sex with someone you don't love, it's nice just to be so close to another human being. The orgasm is a wonderfull thing, wonderfull in it's life affirming properties, it just makes you feel good. Sex with someone you love who loves you back, is about the best thing there is in the world. You can lack money, lack friends, lack beauty and intelligence, but durring sex, for that special moment, nothing in the world means anything (the orgasm, le petite morte) there are no worries, nothing bothers you at all..
Sex can be loving and kind, it can be kinky, dirty and wild. Sometimes human's think too much, sex makes your physciality important again.
The rhthymn's of sex are so primative, like the beating of a heart.. something that is essential and elemental to life.
Now the problem is, some people are happy without sex, and too much sex with too many people can leave you feeling bad. But when you are lonely but still feel sexual desire, it can be one of the lonliest things on earth, to not have a partner who you can be close enough to be intimate with.
All people need love, and for some, love without sex is enough, but for millions of people, sex with or without love is a very, very special thing.. Even sex with some stranger can feel better than being alone sometimes... sex is not love, but at the moment of orgasm it can feel very close to it...
Sigh.. sorry, I hope you understand my answer.. sex is not everrything, nobody NEEDS sex, some people don't want sex, but for those that do, it can be very beautiful, it can make you feel beautiful and loved...
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (7 August 2010):
Your question is very hard, so that is why it has taken me so long to give you a proper answer...
But while I am thinking, look at this post, this guy has put forward a different opinion on sex.. I think this would be a good post for you to read and write an answer too.
http://www.dearcupid.org/question/sex-is-evil.html
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (5 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionMiamine, what is your opinion on why people should have sexual satisfaction?
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (5 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionMiamine, what you just said is exactly what I need to hear.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (5 August 2010):
"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." (NotsoEasyCharles)
Everything you say is very true, and them people are wrong. Our society treats people with disabilities as if they are invisible or as if they don't also have human needs.. This hurts me a lot. When your legs or head is broken, it dosen't mean your heart, or your penis or vagina is broken too. There is no reason why people with disabilities should not have sexual satisfaction. The people you were talking to were wrong. If people weren't so cold, irrational and insensitive, they would understand that people with disabilities need sympathy, because this world rejects them and makes it hard for them to find love.
Youu were right, I believe that they were wrong.
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (5 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionRachel. Did you tell your distant cousin that you sympathized with him?
...............................
A
male
reader, Illithid +, writes (4 August 2010):
 By “void” I just meant the longing in a person’s heart. There’s no way to determine at what point sex ceases to be required for a person’s mental wellbeing and becomes indulgence. That point varies from person to person and even day to day. And while I think it’s very easy for leaving a person over poor performance to fall into the shallow side, I’m one of those people that thinks of sex as far more than just a quick few minutes of physical action.
I’ve always felt sex is something spiritual, for lack of a more concrete word. It’s a bond, an intimacy that should already start off with a mental and emotional connection. It’s a culmination of a relationship, not the stepping stone so many people use it as. It’s not a quest for passion and a tool to bring two people closer. It’s a manifestation of the passion and closeness two people already have that they just can’t contain. And at that point, it’s largely irrelevant how much sex a person’s having. It’s not quantity, it’s quality. A person can have sex three times a day for thirty years straight and never have really had the connection that fills the void. How many people in their 20’s bounce from relationship to relationship, bedroom to bedroom, fling to fling? They rack up a number of encounters and partners that reaches into the triple-digits and yet are still lonely. They share ever bit of their bodies but their hearts are still isolated. But then contrast that to the happily married couple that grows more deeply in love year after year, grows more tightly bound to each other with time. They may only have sex once or twice a week, maybe not even that often, but their voids are filled.
I don’t know what your beliefs are, but even theology aside, I recommend the book “Sex God” by Rob Bell (a remarkably quick read). His interpretation of sex is that the physical is a very small part of the whole and people chasing after that iceberg tip are missing out.
Now as for myself? Sure I’d like to have sex someday. I hear it feels rather good, so it might be fun to try. But for me, personally, my void is filled by the touch of a woman that I share love with. A cuddle, a hug, even just her brushing against me as she walks by. Closeness, tenderness, love channeled through skin. In my own humble personal opinion, “sex” is an amplifier of existing intimacy, but not the root power source... and when the connection’s there, you can feel it even without the sex.
I’m not sure how well I’m expressing myself right now, as I’m rather tired at the moment, so I apologize if I’m not making much sense.
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (4 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHi, Illithid, your response is very thought provoking. can you elaborate more on that "void" produced by a lack of "physical connection" I ask because 90% of the time when I have been asking various people on the web people say "of course I don't care. Stop being shy and talk to girls." But its not that simple. You are the first person who has made a distinction between being sympathetic toward one sort of sexuality but not another kind of sexuality.
Some people feel that they need sex more than once a day while others only want it once a week/or a month. Is it filling a void than can be filled with by "physical connection" that would motivate a person to have sex that often? Or is there some reasonable baseline and that the kind of people who are having sex many times a day are doing it for more shallow reasons?
Also many people complain that there boyfriends are unable to give them sexual satisfaction. Now is the fact that they want to leave them for not giving them satisfaction mean that they are seeking the more shallow aspects of sex?
...............................
A
male
reader, Illithid +, writes (4 August 2010):
Charles, thank you for the compliment! I’d like to think I’m rational. I am an engineer by trade and rather pride myself on being a geek.
Though I think I disagree with the wording of your premise, "If we correctly assume that it is important that a person has sex…” It’s not the sex that’s important. It’s that the person is satisfied… happy. Many people are entirely content to spend their lives without sex. Mother Theresa is said to have remained a virgin her entire life and yet she connected with people on so deep a level as to be revered worldwide. But we aren’t all saints, and we aren’t all happy without the physical connection sex brings. And that unfulfilled void… THAT deserves sympathy.
I wish to encourage you. Please reread the response from the female anonymous below. Take her words to heart. You may not have more lovers in your life than there are numbers to count, but don’t believe that you will have none, either. Please. Life’s a funny thing. Even people that think they could never find someone, do find that special person that sees through everything.
And even though we’re just text on a computer screen here at DearCupid, we are honored to encourage and support you. We don’t shy away from talking about sex, or pain, or frustration. We’ve all been there to some degree and in some form and we all care.
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (4 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionRachel, your response was actually very supportive.
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (4 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionA reader, anonymous, writes (4 August 2010). I tried to give a more simplified answer. Your answer seemed supportive and non rebuking, though.
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (4 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionJmtmj, I have asked this question a number of times and I usually get responses that tell me that they don't even grasp the question. Like Illithid said, sex is not something people can talk about rationally, and that Is why I tried so hard to respond the various rebuttals to the essential question in such a long winded way.
The essential question which I am not sure if this articulation is in fact the essential question until I hear peoples responses, is "if we correctly assume that it is important that a person has sex shouldn't the respective attitude toward a person who is frustrated from not having sex because of factors beyond that persons control, which for the sake of argument we will assume are real barriers to sex, when that person articulates his/her feeling toward others about their situation be encouragement and support rather than indifference and rebuke"?
So far I have only gotten indifference and rebuke when talking about this subject to others. Despite the various reasons that I have given in the very long discussion on the left.
...............................
A
male
reader, NotsoEasyCharles +, writes (4 August 2010):
NotsoEasyCharles is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHi, thank you for your response, Illithid. You seem to think in a very rational way.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (4 August 2010): I'm not positive of what your questions exactly are. You speak beautifully, but went into such great length--which was great, I'm telling you--but simplify your question(s) and I will answer as honestly as I can.
I can tell you, honestly, that I met this guy once that was not only blind, but in a wheelchair. Unable to use his legs.
This man was truly a great guy. I'd sit out and read to him and we'd talk so deeply and he really was a real smart guy. He was not shallow in the least. Which, well, every human being is at least a little. Nothing he did was selfish.
I honestly think I did, in a way, change him. Before I came, she was quite depressed. Quiet. Shy. Waiting to die. He was helped financially, given a job, etc. He really believed no one would ever love him though. This smart, handsome, man! He truly was handsome, too. It was insane.
I liked him very much. You know what? I did have sex with him. And he probably did love me very much. And it was very intimate and sensual. Better than any "able" man has ever done, honestly.
I've remained great friends with this man. I did not deserve him in a romantic way. He was so kind and perfect. He truly was.
You sound intelligent, kind, and I like your views.
There will be girl--just like me: peppy, childish, accepting, loving, optimistic--whom will love you more than anything.
Darling, you sound great.
I'm so sorry for you, though. I understand--I think I do--what you're saying. I agree with "Illithid" in his answers. Because sex is private and open at the same time--it's not as considered.
Sorry I couldn't be of more help!
...............................
A
male
reader, Illithid +, writes (4 August 2010):
While I greatly appreciate the careful articulation of your thoughts, the sheer verbosity has obfuscated the specific question you’re asking, I’m afraid. So I’m going to reply to what I believe to be the three questions I see.
Question 1 appears to be, “Shouldn’t people care about your unmet sexual desires with the same vigor that they care about your other stresses, whether financial, social, or physical?” My answer is yes, they should care about anything that’s causing you emotional pain. Unfortunately, so many complain about needing sex for shallow reasons, simply seeking a thrill and a conquest, that your legitimate and deeply thought out concerns are lost in the noise of an immature and sex-seeking society.
Question 2 appears to be, “Does mentioning a yearning for a sexual relationship imply that you are looking for pity sex or that you are suggesting it in an immediate and specific way with whom you’re speaking?” To some people, it does, but only because most people have difficulty removing themselves from a conversation and dealing with an abstract subject from a distance. Recall the remarkable emotional response people have when someone “plays the devil’s advocate” in controversial subjects. While you’re discussing the subject in general, those you are talking to find it difficult to remember that while they are your conversation partner, you are not suggesting they be a sexual partner. Though given the subtle and complicated nuance of connotation in sexual matters, it may be best to verbalize that you are speaking merely philosophically and not with intent of obtaining sex with your conversation partner, lest they making incorrect assumptions based on their perception of your tone.
Question 3 appears to be, “Why don’t professionals seem to pay due respect to the sexual ramifications of Asperger's?” I wish I had an answer for you for that one. I concur entirely that the sexual relationship, being so deeply tied to romantic and emotional relationships, bears more mention when discussing those who find relationships somewhat more difficult. Perhaps it was a matter of prioritization of other topics that left little room for sex, or perhaps it was simply timidness of the subject that caused the exclusion. Sex is the part of human existence most removed from logic, and I fear that affects even professional writing.
Sadly, while sex is something that is talked about every minute of every day, inundates every form of media, charges most every conversation to some degree, controls people, reinforces or ruins relationships, and exerts a force on society virtually unparalleled by any other influence, I don’t think many people understand it outside of the raw, mechanical how-to. And given the ease with which people can become slaves to it, society seems to have built up such a fear of sex (again, outside of the simple and swift physical pleasure of it) that most are afraid to really take a long, hard look at it. Call it overreaction, but people love sex so much that they fear it, and now they fear it so much that they can’t rationally discuss it.
So if I correctly understand the underlying question you have, my advice is this: As much as you are frustrated and saddened that people do not understanding your pain or sympathize with you, you should also realize that they are every bit as confused as you are and perhaps feel you’re not understanding them.
...............................
A
female
reader, WhateverMovesThee +, writes (4 August 2010):
 Well, in my opinion, there are, out there people without physical/mental disabilities who sorely misuse sex and as a result never find out what it's like to "make love" the sort of sex which not only satisfies body but soul as well-and that's sad. But, I think I might agree with you. My distant cousin has Asperger's and we used to communicate by e-mail though he lived only a few miles away...he used to tell me how frustrating it was for him to feel such feelings and being trapped by something beyond his control. He wanted the intimacy "like air" he told me. He was very handsome too, but girls who knew of his condition thought it was against the law and against their morals to sexually be with him. I don't see why wanting just sex is a bad thing in your case. I can feel sympathy for a person who wanted to share that experience and was unable to fully enjoy it. Yes, there are worse things to mourn however, that does not change the fact that it is still something bad for the person experience that void. Going to a prostitute won't get you what you need really. It's not only risky but, being with a stranger who only thinks of money while being the most intimate humans can be with one another-isn't a good way to experience sex. I don't know what else to tell you though...I hope this helped in some way.
-Rachel
...............................
A
male
reader, Jmtmj  +, writes (4 August 2010):
 Ouch... my brain.
I find this all very interesting, but I'm a little tangled on what the main question is to be honest. You've given a lot of information, but if you reply to this post and condense your question/s into single sentences you may find more people will be able to give their honest opinion.
I will reply in length when I get a chance.
...............................
|
