Is it possible to be emotionally poly?

I would say yes. Just as all humans are sexual beings, it doesn't mean all humans have a sexual partner. So, also, just because a person is polyamorous, doesn't mean they have a partner or partners. Even when a person knows they are polyamorous, and are looking for a partner or partners, it doesn't mean they will be able to find them.
 
Why not? Asexual people can have multiple romantic partners and may never engage in sex.

I think it is totally possible to be romantically in love with people and not engage in sexual activity. The love is the same, but the expression is just different.

For some this would be frustrating. For an asexual person this would be completely adequate. For a person with boundaries around physical partners, it might only be tolerable.

You don't even need to include polyamory in this question, because the same principle would apply to a romantic but non-sexual monogamous relationship.

Getting to know asexual people has really changed my views on love and sex.
 
I'd like to know more about asexual people, if you don't mind, Mono. I'm assuming that being asexual is a lifestyle choice, like celibacy. Or do you mean that asexuality is part of the sexuality of a person?
 
idealist said:
I'm assuming that being asexual is a lifestyle choice like celibacy. Or do you mean that asexuality is a part of the sexuality of a person?
Click to expand...

Asexuality is an orientation, just like gay or straight. We just attended a seminar/meeting hosted by a leading asexual activist. People misunderstand them just as much as they misunderstand polyamorous people.
 
The way I see it, polyamory is about emotion first, so I don't think it requires being sexual or wanting to be sexual with several people. It is the most common case, yes, but not the only one. If that's how you are, you could define yourself as polyamorous and monosexual, for instance, or asexual, if you're not monosexual either.

@idealist, asexual people aren't attracted sexually to anyone. It's an orientation like heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, etc. The prefix "a" is a privative, meaning sexually attracted to nobody.

They can still be heteroromantic, homoromantic, biromantic, describing who they might fall in love with. The sexual attraction simply doesn't exist. It's not about the choice of resisting one's sexual urges, it's about not having any to begin with.
 
MonoVCPHG said:
Asexual people can have multiple romantic partners and may never engage in sex.

I think it is totally possible to be romantically in love with people and not engage in sexual activity. The love is the same, but the expression is just different.

For some this would be frustrating. For an asexual person this would be completely adequate. For a person with boundaries around physical partners it might only be tolerable.

You don't even need to include polyamory in this question, because the same principle would apply to a romantic but non-sexual monogamous relationship.

Getting to know asexual people has really changed my views on love and sex.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that getting to know this forum will change my view on a number of things. I have never really thought about anyone being asexual, but it makes absolute sense if that person has no sexual leanings or predispositions. Thank you for teaching me something new today.
 
snickers said:
I have never really thought about anyone being asexual, but it makes absolute sense if that person has no sexual leanings or predispositions.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, I have this deep sense that the evolution of humankind will lead to asexuality as our intelligence increases. The collective energy that people expend trying to get into other people's pants could power our cities. But that is a future of extreme efficiency without any of the fun. ;)
 
Tonberry said:
The way I see it, polyamory is about emotion first, so I don't think it requires being sexual or wanting to be sexual with several people. It is the most common case, yes, but not the only one. If that's how you are, you could define yourself as polyamorous and monosexual, for instance, or asexual, if you're not monosexual either.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Tonberry. That answered a question I have been wondering about for quite some time.

I am new to the idea of polyamory, and I am not certain if I will ever make the choice to be poly. But in my quest to better understand it, I had an epiphany of sorts when I was reading about NRE vs. ORE.

I can honestly say that while married these past years I have shared love with two other individuals. If I had allowed these emotionally-close friendships and love to become more intimate, they would have bloomed into new relationships that I was not prepared to have at the time.

Since I began reading more about polyamory, I realized that although my husband and I have participated in a very healthy and sexually-monogamous relationship, we have both at times been attracted to people outside our relationship in ways that leaned more towards mutual affection and nonphysical intimacy (rather than general physical attraction). Looking back at our relationship, I was struck by how each of these situations that have come up over the years had injected new life into our marriage, the result of which was that, on a couple of occasions, the outside party became a very close and dear friend for one or both of us.

However, because we live in a monogamous society, it is very hard to admit to yourself that you have loved or fallen in love with someone outside of your marriage. As a result, I never explored the close bonds I shared with these other individuals in a manner that would have been more truthful to me or my husband, until now.

This is still much more that my husband and I need to sort out as we continue our discussions on this subject, the least of which includes jealousy. But that is another topic for another thread.

In the meantime, you have answered something that has been sitting at the forefront of my mind in regards to polyamory. I would have to venture a guess that there are more people out there who are emotionally polyamorous but physically monosexual than I would have previously thought, including myself.
 
You can search for the term "asexual" here. There are threads on the topic that have some good links on them for asexuals and those who are interested.
 
Since you enjoy a sexual relationship with your husband you would not qualify as asexual, but as physically monogamous. I'm replacing 'monosexuality' with 'monogamy' to describe your situation, because monosexuality is a term that encompasses hetero- and homosexuality as opposed to bisexuality.

Emotional polyamory can also arise from a situation where the partners involved have incompatible sexual/relationship orientations, such as a woman being in love with a gay man. Or, a straight man and a straight woman could be in love, but choose to honor their existing monogamous commitments, and restrict the physical aspects of the relationship to a minimum. Whether this would still be considered cheating, and how long the situation is likely to last, is of course, open to debate.

So, maybe you are a poly-in-waiting? 😛 Your other loves could have a mutually enjoyable physical expression, but until now, for various reasons, haven't.

I understand your point in finding emotional nourishment in non-physical connections, without a pressing need for the relationship to turn physical. I usually need to be very strongly infatuated with someone to feel a strong physical desire for them, and tend to have more of an 'I can take it or leave it' attitude towards sex at other times.
 
Last edited:
This has to be an individual answer. I personally would have an extremely difficult time feeling amorous with someone I was not able to be romantic or physically intimate with. There would be a piece missing for me.
 
Sorry, I missed the part where you said that you have sex, but not with this particular person.

I have a non-sexual boyfriend. Our love is no less powerful than what I have with the other loves in my life. It is somehow more naive and innocent, as we don't know certain things about one another, but I quite like that for now, and am enjoying it just the same. I am no less committed to the relationship than to the others. So why not?
 
MonoVCPHG said:
Getting to know asexual people has really changed my view on love and sex.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm going to show my ignorance here, but I'll apply it to my personal experience with my sex life. Let me know if I am totally off, which I probably am, but oh well...here I go, because I've been thinking about this since I read the post.

I have a certain weight (when I can fit into my size 4 clothes) that I feel really good about myself. I like what I see when I look in the mirror. No matter what I put on, I like it. I can wear dresses, jeans, skirts, lace, leather... doesn't matter. When I see myself, I am turned on! My body is more stimulated and I am a lot more sexual. I'm more attracted to myself and I am more attracted to other people. My sexual desire is heightened a great deal.

Then I have the other weight, when I am a size 6.

Let me stop here and say that for someone else, the "feel good" size might be a 10 or 12, and the other "not so feel good" size could be a 14. Don't get hung up on the actual size. My point is how I feel about myself, how my body feels, how my body responds to other people.

When I am heavier, I don't like what I see in the mirror as much. I can put on the dress, the jeans, the leather, but it's just okay. And I'm not as attracted to other people. I am not nearly as sexually stimulated. I can "take it or leave it," pretty much.

This is my question: how do you think sexuality and asexuality are affected by our own perception of our physical attractiveness?
 
idealist said:
How do you think sexuality and asexuality are affected by our own perception of our physical attractiveness?
Click to expand...

Both of the people who identified as asexual at the meeting were very attractive. The male was young, fit, vigorous-looking and confident. The woman was young, great curves, amazing wit and a great smile. I don't think it plays any part in it at all. I think that would be like a guy identifying as homosexual because he had a small build or feminine features. Even the idea of self image issues implies that asexuality can not exist in a healthy, fully-confident person. The asexual woman simply did not have any desire to engage in sexual activity with anyone.

I think I can relate, at times. When my connection is broken or diminished with Redpepper, I don't feel the desire for sex with anyone, but it isn't from being turned off. At those times there is just no desire for sex. I'm not saying that asexual people have any issue with connection. Asexual people develop can fully romantic relationships without the desire to express them sexually.

I acknowledge asexuality as an orientation that does not need a sexual outlet to express romantic love.

Do you find it hard to believe that a person could actually not have an interest in sex?
 
MonoVCPHG said:
Both of the people who identified as asexual at the meeting were very attractive.
Click to expand...

When my body is at size 6, I am still very attractive to others.

MonoVCPHG said:
The male, young fit, vigorous looking and confident. The woman, young, great curves, amazing wit and a great smile. I don't think it plays any part in it at all. I think that would be like a guy identifying as homosexual because he has a small build or feminine features. Even the idea of self image issues implies that asexuality can not exist in a healthy, fully-confident person.
Click to expand...

I think I am going to have to disagree, at least for now. I'll think about it more. I am also a fit, vigorous-looking and extremely confident (notice I left out young) woman.

MonoVCPHG said:
The asexual woman simply did not have any desire to engage in sexual activity with someone. I think I can relate at times. When my connection is broken or diminished with Redpepper I don't feel the desire for sex with anyone. But it isn't from being turned off. At those times there is just no desire for sex. I'm not saying that asexual people have any issue with connection. Asexual people develop fully romantic relationships without the desire to express them sexually.
Click to expand...

I totally get that. I'm not interested in sex either when I'm not turned on by myself.

Okay. Here's the deal. Right now, I'm at size 6. But, getting ready for the weekend, I shaved my entire body (except my head), and put lotion and oil on every surface of my body. And guess what? Out of nowhere, I experienced sexual desire. I think asexual is just a term for "sexually shut down for now," because we are inherently sexual beings, unless there is a short circuit somewhere.


MonoVCPHG said:
I acknowledge asexuality as an orientation that does not need a sexual outlet to express romantic love.

Do you find it hard to believe that a person could actually not have an interest in sex?
Click to expand...

I do not find it hard to believe at all that a person does not have an interest in sex. I know a lot of people who are not interested in sex, and some of them are "seemingly" fit, attractive. etc. I find that incredibly easy to believe. I just think that a person who wants to adopt the label of asexual is someone who has shut down sexually due to a "short circuit," and they aren't interested in becoming a fully-functioning authentic human being.

Just sayin.'
 
idealist said:
I find that incredibly easy to believe. I just think that a person who wants to adopt the label of asexual has shut down sexually due to a "short circuit," and they aren't interested in becoming a fully-functioning authentic human being. Just sayin.'
Click to expand...

The term "short circuit" implies you believe asexual people have something wrong with them. Unfortunately, lots of people would also say that any poly, gay, bi, queer or trans-gendered person also have something wrong with them, because in most mainstream peoples' eyes we are naturally heterosexual and monogamous.

Here is a link to AVEN. They are leading authorities in the Asexual community. Their forum has over 27,000 members, so there is quite a lot of experience to draw from. http://www.asexuality.org/en/
 
Okay, I can agree with you when I think about it this way. There are some basic segments of human life. Some of those segments are:

Emotional
Mental
Physical
Spiritual
Sexual
Home Life
Family
Career
Financial
Health
Creative
Gifts and Talents

So, for every human being, these are life segments that can be developed, if you choose to. Every human being can choose to delve into any of these areas, all of the areas, or none of the areas.

An asexual person simply doesn't want to delve into their own sexuality.
 
idealist said:
An asexual person simply doesn't want to delve into their own sexuality.
Click to expand...

I'm not asexual, so I shouldn't be speaking for them, but I think they would disagree. They delve more deeply into their sexuality then most, because a lot of them have spent the greater portion of their life figuring out why they weren't sexual towards others. Please take a look at their site. I don't like possibly misrepresenting them, but I do feel protective of any group that understands itself better than anyone on the outside could.

You aren't alone in having such a hard time with the concept of people actually not desiring sex, but I have a hard time with the concept of people actually being polyamorous, so I can relate to your confusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top