Romantic relationships with no sex involved – is that supposed to be enough?

In the following, I am in no way suggesting that people should always do relationships the same way. Not at all. Everyone who has listened to me for five seconds should know this. However, what people seem to insist on having the right to do is to dictate the rules of the relationship THEY WANT and force another person to whom the parameters of the suggested relationship aren’t ideal, and remain in that relationship and faithful to their partner. As this sounds like they said to them that this shouldn’t happen to them but them instead, I’ll write you an illustrative dialogue:

Ruth: “Robert, I am a demisexual. I do not want to have a sexual relationship. All I want is the romantic part.”

Robert: “Oh, OK, I’m cool with that.” Goes off and starts sleeping with another woman. Ruth finds out.

Ruth: “Robert, how DARE YOU?! I thought I could trust you!”

Robert (confused): “What do you mean, you said you don’t want a relationship.”

Ruth: “But we’ve been cuddling and chatting – we’re in a relationship!”

Robert: “We’re friends!”

Ruth: “No I said I’m a demisexual! You know that, I don’t want the sex part!”

Robert: “We’ll you’re not having the sex part, are you? I, on the other hand, want the whole romance! I want the sex, I want the romance, I want the intellectual connection – you made it clear that’s not what you are after! What is your problem?”

Ruth: “But you said you were cool with that!”

Robert: “I am.”

Ruth: “But you can’t sleep with other women if we’re together.”

Robert: “We’re not ‘together’, we’re friends like you said, you don’t want the sex part, so I’m not going to push the topic, am I?”

Ruth: “But I thought I made it clear I don’t want the sex part in the relationship, but we’ve had all the other relationship stuff…”

Robert: “Yeah, because we’re friends… Or so I thought…”

Ruth: “But how could you do this to me?”

Robert: “DO WHAT to you? You cannot expect I would STOP being sexual and having a RELATIONSHIP with you if you don’t want the same thing as I want.”

Ruth: “But you said you were OK with me not wanting to have sex…”

Robert: “I am PERFECTLY fine with you not wanting to have sex ever, but that DOES MEAN I will have to find a relationship FOR MYSELF, with SOMEONE WHO DOES want to have sex with me. Now, I am not into polyamory, I want monogamy, so this means I can’t be ANYTHING BUT friends with you, can I? And you and I haven’t done anything I wouldn’t do with my friends or with my fuck buddies while I’m single – with them, I would have sex, too.”

Ruth: “But you weren’t single…”

Robert: “Oh but I was!”

And so on.

The confusion

The Young Soul* thinker type seems to process relationships in a way that if you remain in their life without throwing a hissy fit and calling them a stuck-up whore or the like before you slam a door behind yourself on your way out, they believe that THEIR definition of the relationship applies automatically. As in “you’re cool with that” means that you will continue the relationship on their terms, and exclude others as per their expectations. This is because a Old Souls* WOULD NEVER enter a relationship in which only one person is satisfied, they don’t assume that “I want sex while you don’t” means that there IS a relationship. That statement in itself removes the possibility that there is a relationship unless much more carefully discussed and defined. To a Old Souls*, in this context, “I’m cool with that” means “OK, I’m not going to push that on you, I’ll move on and find someone else, plenty of fish in the Sea.”

Sexual people NEED and DESERVE a sexual relationship

Now, sexual people, whether male or female, deserve to have a sexual relationship just as much as non-sexuals deserve to have a non-sexual relationship – just not together. Whether sex IS or IS NOT, both partners must find it THE IDEAL, the desired way that things are. If this is not the case, the relationship should never continue.

Therefore, if a sexual person ever finds themselves in a situation where a demisexual tries to redefine the relationship as a non-sexual one, the sexual person MUST MAKE IT CLEAR that it means that this relationship will never be anything more than a friendship and that they will find another person to give their loyalty and love to.

A SEXUAL PERSON CAN NEVER PRIORITIZE A NON-SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP, and there is no reason why they should agree to try. Non-sexuality, to a sexual person is never something “better” or “more” or “more pure” or “more spiritual”, only lacking and a bit naive or boring, the obligation, at best. A sexual person NEEDS a sexual person to prioritize, and any non-sexual person should just understand that’s how it goes. Sexual people love sexual people MUCH MORE than non-sexual people, REGARDLESS of how long that relationship has lasted or how special the non-sexual party might feel this relationship to be.

HOWEVER, obviously, the solution is not that the non-sexual person has reluctant sex to appease the sexual person

Non-sexual the Young Soul* will also easily see the only solution to this problem to be that they have to agree to have sex, then. However, that is NOT the solution. A relationship that exists between a sexual person and a non-sexual person CAN ONLY EVER BE CALLED A FRIENDSHIP, and it CANNOT BE exclusive. A sexual person CANNOT honestly associate a non-sexual person as a true romantic partner, it simply doesn’t make any sense to them.

A non-sexual relationship CAN NOT, WILL NOT, and has NEVER BEEN a true priority of ANY sexual person, male or female, in any other way but on paper, through force and self-denial alone. Sexual people MUST stop allowing non-sexuals to insist that their way is the right way, as they don’t even understand what they are asking sexual people to give up for a relationship that will be PROFOUNDLY lacking no matter how romantic it is otherwise.

Sexual people will also note that BAD/POOR SEX or sex with a partner who one isn’t crazy about does also not compensate for what we truly want out of a relationship.

Subscribe to get a Daily Message