I'm happily single

[Mana1]

I went with fiancé mode. We're not engaged but we do live together so it's probably more descriptive of our relationship :).

 

[antemortem]

Currently in a new relationship.

 

[Kanzler]

This is where I get all the gossip for "who's with who" now.

 

[The_Consumer]

I'm not ready to give up the playa lifestyle just yet

 

[Sydian]

I just started dating a guy a couple of weeks ago, and I'm pretty happy so far!

 

[Seki]

Single, simply because I feel that I am too young for a relationship.

 

[perthskies]

I'm currently living the single life, am quite content with that at the moment but of course I'm always keeping a keen eye out for that special someone. ;)

In High school and uni unless you're extremely outgoing, have an extensive network of friends or happen to be at the right place at the right time (e.g. clubs, after school activities, same class/tutorial) you're probably not going to find that special someone easily. But that's OK, you can still meet someone outside of those places.

Also bear in mind with a relationship depending on how far you go you're making a commitment to each other. So if you're in one, please don't neglect it! (I speak from a past experience)

Are you willing to play matchmaker? ;)

Wasn't there a PC Matchmaking event on Valentine's Day? xD Think Kura oraganised it.

 

[Frazzevous]

Single, though I partially want it to change sometime soon or something. q: Then again, I don't really mind waiting for the right person. -u-

 

[KittenKoder]

All I have to say is that I am asexual, I think that pretty much explains it all.

 

[Nathan]

All I have to say is that I am asexual, I think that pretty much explains it all.

Hmm, asexual people can be in love or dating someone. They still have emotions, right? So I don't see why an asexual couldn't be in love?

 

[hughes]

Single. Always have been. Probably will be for the foreseeable future. Although I've liked a guy for almost a year now, but I don't really know what to do about it. I talk to him occasionally, but that's about it. But I know he likes Pokemon and we played together once, so that's something I guess.

 

[hughes]

You should start getting flirty gurllll, playful physical contact, sitting close to, playing with your hair, laughing at his jokes etc. Chances are this guy likes you too, but is just too shy to say so. I mean you said he likes Pokémon, we're not the most socially adept bunch. If that doesn't work, which it may not if the guy is as clueless as me then i'd suggest asking him to go out with you somewhere, using a funny Pokémon line, i'm sure it'll break the ice. If he's not interested then oh well, you can still be friends.

Gahh, this is what my friends tell me, but flirting's just weird to me. I don't see him enough to get these chances and it's not like I hang out with him. I'm hoping we have a class together next semester, but I'm not sure yet (we've had like four classes together because he's in my major, but a year below me). I just know that he didn't sign up for one of the ones I'm taking, which is of course the class with the group project. And I blew the ball last year when I had a class with him with a project and couldn't bring myself to ask him to be in my group. :/

 

[KittenKoder]

Hmm, asexual people can be in love or dating someone. They still have emotions, right? So I don't see why an asexual couldn't be in love?

Emotions, yes, sexual attractions, no. Very few asexual people pair up, and then it's only with other asexual people, due to the fact that there will not be any sex involved. Even then, it's not "dating," as it is generally used, but really just best friends. Sometimes they will call it dating, makes the sexual people less apprehensive for some reason, but there is no mating, no breeding, no petting involved, if there was, they'd not be asexual.

Many people talk of being "abstinent," but an asexual cannot be abstinent, there is nothing to abstain from. There is literally no sexual desires or attractions at all.

 

[Dakotah]

Emotions, yes, sexual attractions, no. Very few asexual people pair up, and then it's only with other asexual people, due to the fact that there will not be any sex involved. Even then, it's not "dating," as it is generally used, but really just best friends. Sometimes they will call it dating, makes the sexual people less apprehensive for some reason, but there is no mating, no breeding, no petting involved, if there was, they'd not be asexual.

Many people talk of being "abstinent," but an asexual cannot be abstinent, there is nothing to abstain from. There is literally no sexual desires or attractions at all.

Yes, asexuals that do not engage in any type of sex abstain from sex. Abstinence by its very definition is the willful avoidance of sexual activity. A person does not have to have sexual attraction in order to engage in sexual activity. Just because you choose to abstain from sex does not mean you are incapable of having sex. Put another way, if people only had sex with the people they were attracted to there would be a whole lot less porn out there.

 

[KittenKoder]

Yes, asexuals that do not engage in any type of sex abstain from sex. Abstinence by its very definition is the willful avoidance of sexual activity. A person does not have to have sexual attraction in order to engage in sexual activity. Just because you choose to abstain from sex does not mean you are incapable of having sex. Put another way, if people only had sex with the people they were attracted to there would be a whole lot less porn out there.

To abstain there must be a desire to do it, there is nothing willful about it, we have absolutely no attraction to anything in a sexual manner, nor do we gain any pleasure from sexual activity of any sort. Nothing to abstain from, nothing to willfully resist or avoid. The label of "asexual" for species that have a form of sexual reproduction is used precisely for those of us lacking this drive at all. There is no choice involved, and that's where you are misunderstanding. I cannot think of an analogy to use to describe it, it's a complete absence of any desire or drive for anything sexual. To me, sex, sexuality, sexual activity, attractions, "love," affections of another, have as much importance to me as what the telemarketer is wearing when they call me.

Sure, how other people think and feel fascinates me, but only in a scientific and psychological way.

 

[hughes]

Don't flirt then, just ask casually 'Hey ............, would you like to hang out sometime?' Thing is, don't allow yourself into the traditional gender roles of a relationship, being a shy, awkward girl makes it more difficult, especially when guys are expected to be the strong, confident ones who are essentially managing everything like you're an object to be transported around. Males are expected to do the ask out, arrange the first date, entertain the girl with their charm etc. It's a huge amount of pressure which many simply can't handle, and everything falls apart. It's also not very healthy if you want to be mature adults with an even status quo in the relationship.

So I'd suggest you just casually ask him face to face whether he'd like to go out with you sometime. My advice is you organise this first 'date' yourself, don't leave it to the guy on the first time, quite simply he will fumble the planning. 2nd time you can ask him to make arrangements so you both feel you're a part of this :) Go somewhere fun, not confronting and awkward like two people sitting face to face at a romantic restaurant would be. Movies, the zoo, ice skating, these are all good choices. You could even just go to each others houses and play Pokemon, watch a DVD, eat lunch etc.

Also, since you seem rather shy, think "what do I lose from asking this guy in a casual fashion to hang out?" The answer is nothing! If he says no for whatever reason just smile and say "Ok then, some other time". You haven't made a fool of yourself, this is all very carefree and normal activity you're partaking in :) Basically you just want to do something as friends together, if the guy likes you things will escalate naturally.

Yeah, given what I've gathered from our conversations, I know I'm going to have to make the first move. It's just getting to a point where I feel comfortable and confident enough to do that. I'm just a person that naturally assumes that if he doesn't try to initiate conversation or whatever, it means he's not interested. But I know that's not true, solely because I would act the same way. It's just very frustrating.

 

[Dakotah]

To abstain there must be a desire to do it, there is nothing willful about it, we have absolutely no attraction to anything in a sexual manner, nor do we gain any pleasure from sexual activity of any sort. Nothing to abstain from, nothing to willfully resist or avoid. The label of "asexual" for species that have a form of sexual reproduction is used precisely for those of us lacking this drive at all. There is no choice involved, and that's where you are misunderstanding. I cannot think of an analogy to use to describe it, it's a complete absence of any desire or drive for anything sexual. To me, sex, sexuality, sexual activity, attractions, "love," affections of another, have as much importance to me as what the telemarketer is wearing when they call me.

KittenKoder, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that not engaging in sexual activity due to your sexual orientation is not a choice, but that's not exactly true, is it? We all make conscious decisions on our actions, what we choose to do or choose not to do. You are making a choice by not engaging in any sexual act, whether you see that or not. So yes, you do abstain from sex because you don't have sex, which is the very definition of abstinence that I quoted. That definition doesn't have anything to do with feelings, only actions.

I am a gay man. that means by nature I am sexually attracted to, and have sex with, other males. But my sexual orientation does not govern the choices that I make. I can, if I so choose, have sex with a woman. I just have no desire to. A point of fact, I have in the past been intimate with a woman, even though I had no attraction for her or derived any pleasure from her. I made a choice during a time in my life that I rejected the fact that I was gay. Attraction had nothing to do with my choice. My sexual orientation had nothing to do with my choice. It was a choice that I made that I take responsibility for.

I feel, based on the conversations I've had with other asexuals, that I should point out that some asexuals do in fact have sex. They felt no attraction for their partner, nor derived any pleasure from the act, but they do it anyway for various personal reasons. Some just to try it out; some because they are pressured by family to continue the family line; and others... well... because they're paid to do it.

I'm glad that you're happy in your life, but please do the common courtesy of refraining from speaking for others. Your experiences, your thoughts and your feelings are yours alone. They are unique and cannot be applied to anyone else. Not even other asexuals.

Sure, how other people think and feel fascinates me, but only in a scientific and psychological way.

Sadly, I fear that you may garner little understanding because you yourself, self-admittedly, are incapable of forming those types of bonds. You can study the mechanics of it all you want, but it won't lead to understanding. True understanding cannot be gained unless it is personally experienced.

 

[Kanzler]

Actually, Jay, I'd argue that this:

KittenKoder, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that not engaging in sexual activity due to your sexual orientation is not a choice, but that's not exactly true, is it? We all make conscious decisions on our actions, what we choose to do or choose not to do. You are making a choice by not engaging in any sexual act, whether you see that or not. So yes, you do abstain from sex because you don't have sex, which is the very definition of abstinence that I quoted. That definition doesn't have anything to do with feelings, only actions.

... is the assumption. How can you be sure that all our actions are conscious decisions? Personally, I've spent the recent part of my life grappling with that question. In my personal observation, not deciding to do something is not the same as deciding not to do something. Not everything in this world can be reduced to a choice, that to me is oversimplifying. I actually made a blog post on this very subject today, coincidentally.

Even though my sexuality is nowhere close to KittenKoder's, I can empathize with where she's coming from. Where she cannot think of an analogy to describe it, I'll try. Think of atheism, the hundreds of millions of people that live in godless countries. They live without god, in the absence of god, yet they haven't made the conscious decision not to live with god. Compare this with atheists who consciously express their disbelief in god. With this analogy I am only trying to demonstrate that 'not' doing something can be the result of a non-choice. We can extend the analogy to the inverse and propose that we can be 'doing' something without choosing to do so. That too I see intuitively - I call it good habits :P Choice is a very tricky concept, but one thing I can argue strongly about it is that it is not black and white.

Personally, I can attribute my lack of sexual activity to choice and non-choice factors. The fact that there haven't been many opportunities I think we can agree is a non-choice factor. The fact that I haven't pursued opportunities, I'd say, can be attribute to both choice and non-choice factors. Sometimes I ask myself "should I"? and answer no - that would be a conscious choice, but what about all those other times? Perhaps if you replaced me with another person in some of my social scenarios it would have led to a sexual encounter - but I didn't act did I? Sexuality, at least for me, is not continually inhibited and only presents itself when I turn the inhibitions off. I think for me I have to be turned on before the inhibitions come off ;)

Okay that probably just destroyed all the seriousness in my post, but my point is that our actions are as much governed by non-choices as they are by conscious actions. Sexual behaviours are reaction to sexual stimuli. If the same stimuli isn't perceived as sexual, then why would there be sexual behaviour - or in other words, a reason to make a choice in the first place?

Also, this thread got serious.

 

[AwesomeRob]

I've been single since I was born and I'm not really happy with this. Sometimes, I feel rather lonely and hope I had a special someone but I'm too clumsy around girls :(

This is exactly how I feel.

 

[Dakotah]

Actually, Jay, I'd argue that this... is the assumption. How can you be sure that all our actions are conscious decisions? Personally, I've spent the recent part of my life grappling with that question. In my personal observation, not deciding to do something is not the same as deciding not to do something. Not everything in this world can be reduced to a choice, that to me is oversimplifying. I actually made a blog post on this very subject today, coincidentally.

You see, I've come to regard failing to choose a choice in of itself. It's a choice of inaction vrs. action. I've been alive on this planet long enough to see the results of people choosing not to act and then failing to take responsibility for the consequences. It leaves me shaking my head.

Even though my sexuality is nowhere close to KittenKoder's, I can empathize with where she's coming from. Where she cannot think of an analogy to describe it, I'll try. Think of atheism, the hundreds of millions of people that live in godless countries. They live without god, in the absence of god, yet they haven't made the conscious decision not to live with god.

You see, herein lies the problem with your analogy. They have made that decision. All cultures on this planet, in one form or another, have had to deal with spirituality and its impact on society. It may not involve a God per se, but some sort of a belief in a higher power has existed throughout all of human history and in every civilization--including those that are atheistic. KittenKoder is cognizant of her sexuality. For her the decision is an informed one. She chooses not to engage in sex of any kind because it is unappealing to her, but that is a choice that she makes. She can easily make a choice to have sex despite being asexual. Again, it's a choice of inaction vrs. action. It's not a question of can't, it's a question of won't.

With this analogy I am only trying to demonstrate that 'not' doing something can be the result of a non-choice. We can extend the analogy to the inverse and propose that we can be 'doing' something without choosing to do so. That too I see intuitively - I call it good habits :P Choice is a very tricky concept, but one thing I can argue strongly about it is that it is not black and white.

And yet, in my experience, inaction is as much a choice as action. The consequences of which are very real.

Personally, I can attribute my lack of sexual activity to choice and non-choice factors. The fact that there haven't been many opportunities I think we can agree is a non-choice factor.

The decisions we make are wholly based on what we know. Ignorance inhibits our ability to make choices. So those opportunities you speak of could very well have arisen, but you may not have recognized them for what they were. Had you recognized them, you very well could have had the opportunity to make a conscious choice to either take advantage of the opportunity or to ignore it.