If you don't need sex for your emotional health as well, it just mean you are frigid.
Never have a relationship with someone who HAS sexual needs when you don't understand what it is to be sexually frustrated.
Sex is a need - both physical and psychological for a person whose sexuality is not deficient in a way.
It is not a problem to have an opinion which is different from mine. However, I don't think that what I wrote in my previous comment is only a matter of my own opinion.
Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health. A person who is sexually rejected by their partner on a regular basis takes it personally which influences their emotional well-being and impacts the quality of their relationship.
You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation. Doing otherwise is at least an expression of total ignorance to sexual frustration experienced by people all around the world (BTW - it is not my case as I am lucky to have a great sex life with my partner).
Masturbation can be sexual relief. You don't need sex to have sexual relief.
"You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation."
That bit of advice does not make you an idiot, that was sound advice you gave. There were other parts of your post I objected to. I objected to being labelled as "deficient". It is reductionist to presume that just because someone is different to you they must be deficient; there are possibilities that you had not considered.
You misunderstood my usage of the word "deficient". I didn't use it to indicate that someone is "deficient" because they are different from me. I meant it as a reference to sexual dysfunctions. Like it or not, but they are officially recognized as sexual health problems both in the DSM-IV and the ICD-10. We can discuss if the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 are reductionist but that would be a different thing.
My posts are based on what I have already stated - i.e. "Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health." Of course, one can masturbate to have sexual relief. But there is still the frustration stemming from the problem to get a partner or being sexually rejected by a partner on a regular basis and this frustration goes hand in hand with unfulfilled sexual needs. In addition, the need for sexual relief is still sexual need regardless of the way how you achieve the relief.
No, I don't misunderstand you at all actually. Being told I have a sexual dysfunction based on no actual evidence is insulting to me. Being told that I am "deficient" means I am being told that I am "not good enough": that is what that word means. That is also insulting to me. You presume I am "deficient" not because you have any evidence to suggest that I am so, but because you presume anyone who does not think like you must have a disorder. It's short-minded of you. And yes, the efficacy of the diagnostic manuals is absolutely relevant here; it is not a "different thing".
Also, I think deciding that "sexual needs" covers any form of sexual relief in including masturbation is a massive leap, and completely changes the meaning of the question.
"I don't understand that there is a middle ground between asexuality and my own sexuality, because I see the world in black and white" - You.
Saying that someone is "deficient" simply because they are different to you is enormously offensive AND illogical. I don't see why you can't see that.
I called that person an "idiot" because they said that someone who does not need sex is deficient, which is by all counts an idiotic thing to say. It's not that I dislike those opinions, it's that they are so obviously wrong.
By your logic, if my doctor finds that I have a tumour and he diagnoses me with cancer, then the doctor is an idiot and he is offensive and illogical. If I am blind and my doctor tells me that I am disabled, I should be offended because he does not respect my unique way of being a human being. If my sexologist finds out that I have no sexual needs, he can diagnose me with a diagnosis. That´s all. Think about it - your opinions might be so obviously wrong and I will not call you an idiot. Maybe you lack two things - sexual needs and education about biology/physiology/psychology etc.
I'm going to quit arguing with you about the first point. "Sexually deficient" is not a merely medical term, it is also an insult in the same way that calling someone "retarded" is both a medical term and an insult. It is not the being diagnosed that is the insult, it is the insult that is the insult. If you can't understand that calling someone "sexually deficient" is offensive, I have no hope of explaining that to you.
Having no sexual needs IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Asexuality IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Hyper-sexuality IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Being somewhere in the middle IS NOT AN ILLNESS. You can't diagnose someone with something that IS NOT AN ILLNESS. These things are not illnesses, they are individual differences.
Desires, no matter how strong, are not needs. Needs are something that MUST happen. The world will not explode if I fail to have sex. I will not die. That may not be the way for some people, but for something to be a NEED it MUST be UNIVERSAL. Sex is NOT a universal need, as proven by myself.
Thanks for sharing your private medical wisdom. Diagnostic manuals of medical doctors are very different from your views but it is OK.
"Sex is not a universal need, as proven by myself." - well, then a blind person might say "eye sight is not a universal human sense, as proven by myself." In fact, my opinion is that sight can be called a human sense (and also hearing, taste, smell...) in spite of the existence of people who are blind or deaf. I strongly believe that you would also object to calling a blind person ill. Not everybody can see, so it is not a universal experience, so we cannot speak about health or illness here... Funny medical wisdom...
What your case proves is only that you MIGHT fulfil the diagnostic criteria of hypoactive sexual desire disorder. However, if your sexual needs are not met by your partner, then if you masturbate, your case can prove that you have sexual needs, e.g. you need sexual relief via masturbation. If you do not need any form of sexual relief, then you do not have sexual needs and medical textbooks and diagnostic manuals can be legitimately used to diagnose you with a dysfunction.
It is not a problem to have an opinion which is different from mine. However, I don't think that what I wrote in my previous comment is only a matter of my own opinion.
Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health. A person who is sexually rejected by their partner on a regular basis takes it personally which influences their emotional well-being and impacts the quality of their relationship.
You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation. Doing otherwise is at least an expression of total ignorance to sexual frustration experienced by people all around the world (BTW - it is not my case as I am lucky to have a great sex life with my partner).
Lack of sex does not necessarily imply rejection by a partner or anyone else, so the point about the emotional impacts of rejection is moot.
The diagnostic manuals are ever-changing. They are not gospel, they are not facts. They are guidelines based on the small amount of information we have.
The key word is "otherwise". "Otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health", you say. "Otherwise". I need to write my essay, otherwise I will fail. By your logic, this means I have "essay needs". I need to write this comment otherwise I will be bored. By your logic, this means I have "comment needs". I need to wash my face otherwise I will become spotty. By your logic, this means I have "face-washing needs". "Otherwise" is a word that turns "needs" on it's head. "Needs" implies there is only one, single course of action: I MUST have sexual relief. "Otherwise" implies there is a conceivable alternative, so it is not true that you MUST have sex after all.
I have no problem with that advice. The advice is sound and probably accurate. That is not what I found idiotic about your post; I'm sure I made perfectly clear what I found idiotic about your post.
The point with lack of sex resulting in sexual frustration makes sense only in case of people who have sexual needs. You can skip that - if you don't have sexual needs it is understandable that discussing emotions going hand in hand with that makes little sense to you.
As for the diagnostic manuals, I agree with you that they are not gospel etc. However, based on knowledge we currently have, conditions which are seen unhealthy or dysfunctional have been defined. You can deal with it or reject it and if you are ill (or dysfunctional) you can call it a different mode of existence.
""Needs" implies there is only one, single course of action: I MUST have sexual relief. "Otherwise" implies there is a conceivable alternative, so it is not true that you MUST have sex after all."
What I mean is this:
A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release and they either have it or experience sexual frustration. I suggested that there are only these possibilities for such person so the term "needs" is accurate in their case. Other possibilities are irrelevant because they are applicable only to people who don't fulfill the condition of having sexual needs such as you are.
Sexual needs?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
If you don't need sex for your emotional health as well, it just mean you are frigid.
Never have a relationship with someone who HAS sexual needs when you don't understand what it is to be sexually frustrated.
Sex is a need - both physical and psychological for a person whose sexuality is not deficient in a way.
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
"There must be something wrong with you if you don't think like me".
Idiot.
--
Naamah
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
-
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Naamah
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
It is not a problem to have an opinion which is different from mine. However, I don't think that what I wrote in my previous comment is only a matter of my own opinion.
Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health. A person who is sexually rejected by their partner on a regular basis takes it personally which influences their emotional well-being and impacts the quality of their relationship.
You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation. Doing otherwise is at least an expression of total ignorance to sexual frustration experienced by people all around the world (BTW - it is not my case as I am lucky to have a great sex life with my partner).
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Masturbation can be sexual relief. You don't need sex to have sexual relief.
"You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation."
That bit of advice does not make you an idiot, that was sound advice you gave. There were other parts of your post I objected to. I objected to being labelled as "deficient". It is reductionist to presume that just because someone is different to you they must be deficient; there are possibilities that you had not considered.
--
Naamah
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You misunderstood my usage of the word "deficient". I didn't use it to indicate that someone is "deficient" because they are different from me. I meant it as a reference to sexual dysfunctions. Like it or not, but they are officially recognized as sexual health problems both in the DSM-IV and the ICD-10. We can discuss if the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 are reductionist but that would be a different thing.
My posts are based on what I have already stated - i.e. "Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health." Of course, one can masturbate to have sexual relief. But there is still the frustration stemming from the problem to get a partner or being sexually rejected by a partner on a regular basis and this frustration goes hand in hand with unfulfilled sexual needs. In addition, the need for sexual relief is still sexual need regardless of the way how you achieve the relief.
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, I don't misunderstand you at all actually. Being told I have a sexual dysfunction based on no actual evidence is insulting to me. Being told that I am "deficient" means I am being told that I am "not good enough": that is what that word means. That is also insulting to me. You presume I am "deficient" not because you have any evidence to suggest that I am so, but because you presume anyone who does not think like you must have a disorder. It's short-minded of you. And yes, the efficacy of the diagnostic manuals is absolutely relevant here; it is not a "different thing".
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Also, I think deciding that "sexual needs" covers any form of sexual relief in including masturbation is a massive leap, and completely changes the meaning of the question.
"If I do not like your opinions or if I cannot understand them because I am asexual, then I will call you an idiot."
Deprived Of Manhood, d.o.m.
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
"I don't understand that there is a middle ground between asexuality and my own sexuality, because I see the world in black and white" - You.
Saying that someone is "deficient" simply because they are different to you is enormously offensive AND illogical. I don't see why you can't see that.
I called that person an "idiot" because they said that someone who does not need sex is deficient, which is by all counts an idiotic thing to say. It's not that I dislike those opinions, it's that they are so obviously wrong.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
By your logic, if my doctor finds that I have a tumour and he diagnoses me with cancer, then the doctor is an idiot and he is offensive and illogical. If I am blind and my doctor tells me that I am disabled, I should be offended because he does not respect my unique way of being a human being. If my sexologist finds out that I have no sexual needs, he can diagnose me with a diagnosis. That´s all. Think about it - your opinions might be so obviously wrong and I will not call you an idiot. Maybe you lack two things - sexual needs and education about biology/physiology/psychology etc.
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I'm going to quit arguing with you about the first point. "Sexually deficient" is not a merely medical term, it is also an insult in the same way that calling someone "retarded" is both a medical term and an insult. It is not the being diagnosed that is the insult, it is the insult that is the insult. If you can't understand that calling someone "sexually deficient" is offensive, I have no hope of explaining that to you.
Having no sexual needs IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Asexuality IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Hyper-sexuality IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Being somewhere in the middle IS NOT AN ILLNESS. You can't diagnose someone with something that IS NOT AN ILLNESS. These things are not illnesses, they are individual differences.
Desires, no matter how strong, are not needs. Needs are something that MUST happen. The world will not explode if I fail to have sex. I will not die. That may not be the way for some people, but for something to be a NEED it MUST be UNIVERSAL. Sex is NOT a universal need, as proven by myself.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Thanks for sharing your private medical wisdom. Diagnostic manuals of medical doctors are very different from your views but it is OK.
"Sex is not a universal need, as proven by myself." - well, then a blind person might say "eye sight is not a universal human sense, as proven by myself." In fact, my opinion is that sight can be called a human sense (and also hearing, taste, smell...) in spite of the existence of people who are blind or deaf. I strongly believe that you would also object to calling a blind person ill. Not everybody can see, so it is not a universal experience, so we cannot speak about health or illness here... Funny medical wisdom...
What your case proves is only that you MIGHT fulfil the diagnostic criteria of hypoactive sexual desire disorder. However, if your sexual needs are not met by your partner, then if you masturbate, your case can prove that you have sexual needs, e.g. you need sexual relief via masturbation. If you do not need any form of sexual relief, then you do not have sexual needs and medical textbooks and diagnostic manuals can be legitimately used to diagnose you with a dysfunction.
It is not a problem to have an opinion which is different from mine. However, I don't think that what I wrote in my previous comment is only a matter of my own opinion.
Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health. A person who is sexually rejected by their partner on a regular basis takes it personally which influences their emotional well-being and impacts the quality of their relationship.
You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation. Doing otherwise is at least an expression of total ignorance to sexual frustration experienced by people all around the world (BTW - it is not my case as I am lucky to have a great sex life with my partner).
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Lack of sex does not necessarily imply rejection by a partner or anyone else, so the point about the emotional impacts of rejection is moot.
The diagnostic manuals are ever-changing. They are not gospel, they are not facts. They are guidelines based on the small amount of information we have.
The key word is "otherwise". "Otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health", you say. "Otherwise". I need to write my essay, otherwise I will fail. By your logic, this means I have "essay needs". I need to write this comment otherwise I will be bored. By your logic, this means I have "comment needs". I need to wash my face otherwise I will become spotty. By your logic, this means I have "face-washing needs". "Otherwise" is a word that turns "needs" on it's head. "Needs" implies there is only one, single course of action: I MUST have sexual relief. "Otherwise" implies there is a conceivable alternative, so it is not true that you MUST have sex after all.
I have no problem with that advice. The advice is sound and probably accurate. That is not what I found idiotic about your post; I'm sure I made perfectly clear what I found idiotic about your post.
--
Naamah
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
The point with lack of sex resulting in sexual frustration makes sense only in case of people who have sexual needs. You can skip that - if you don't have sexual needs it is understandable that discussing emotions going hand in hand with that makes little sense to you.
As for the diagnostic manuals, I agree with you that they are not gospel etc. However, based on knowledge we currently have, conditions which are seen unhealthy or dysfunctional have been defined. You can deal with it or reject it and if you are ill (or dysfunctional) you can call it a different mode of existence.
""Needs" implies there is only one, single course of action: I MUST have sexual relief. "Otherwise" implies there is a conceivable alternative, so it is not true that you MUST have sex after all."
What I mean is this:
A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release and they either have it or experience sexual frustration. I suggested that there are only these possibilities for such person so the term "needs" is accurate in their case. Other possibilities are irrelevant because they are applicable only to people who don't fulfill the condition of having sexual needs such as you are.