Asexuality and Marriage

[underacloud]

And when does one have this conversation? Before or after the other person has fallen in love?

Well, if she’s dead serious about not addressing her circumstances medically and/or psychologically, she might as well have this chat on date number 1. I expect it will be very difficult to find the sort of man who might be interested in this sort of marriage, so it’s best not to waste people’s time along the way.

Misty, unlike some, I don’t think you need to seek help for being asexual unless you are serious about marriage.

Yes, I agree. I have a sister who I would describe as asexual (she has never directly used that term to describe herself as far as I know, but has discussed her lack of sexual feelings) who is a cloistered nun. I imagine being asexual in that context is somewhat more convenient than otherwise.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

Well, if she’s dead serious about not addressing her circumstances medically and/or psychologically, she might as well have this chat on date number 1. I expect it will be very difficult to find the sort of man who might be interested in this sort of marriage, so it’s best not to waste people’s time along the way.

Yes, I agree. I have a sister who I would describe as asexual (she has never directly used that term to describe herself as far as I know, but has discussed her lack of sexual feelings) who is a cloistered nun. I imagine being asexual in that context is somewhat more convenient than otherwise.

I have only recently begun formally to understand myself as asexual and have not yet officially been in a romantic relationship since I began identifying as such, but I am also very open about it with people whom I think are ready to hear and potentially accept it. I mean, I don’t go around flaunting it, but, if it comes up in conversation, I will try to explain it, again, if I trust the person with that information as I just said.

I would certainly bring it up as soon as possible if one of the other of us made a formal declaration that we wanted to be in a romantic relationship. There is absolutely no question about that, especially since I don’t “date” lightly. I am always forming that kind of relationship with a view to potential marriage in the future. So, yes, you don’t have to worry about me at all not addressing the issue head-on at the first possible opportunity.

 

[underacloud]

For the umpteenth time, I don’t want to be “fixed”.

That’s fine. That’s your prerogative. It just means that the most direct answer to your question is that marriage isn’t for you.

Not to be flippant about this, but, to me, it’s sort of like some people like chocolate and others don’t.

If you didn’t like chocolate, would you seek a job that required you to eat chocolate?

 

[MysticMissMisty]

That’s fine. That’s your prerogative. It just means that the most direct answer to your question is that marriage isn’t for you.

If you didn’t like chocolate, would you seek a job that required you to eat chocolate?

I think the jury’s still out here on whether sex is necessarily a requirement for marriage…

I long for romance and a life-partner. I don’t like sex. Heteroromantic asexual. Look it up. That’s the problem.

 

[Rau]

I think the jury’s still out here on whether sex is necessarily a requirement for marriage…

I long for romance and a life-partner. I don’t like sex. Heteroromantic asexual. Look it up. That’s the problem.

Seeking a life partner from among men is the least likely place you will find one that meets your criteria.

Seeking a life partner for marriage seems inappropriate for you. Your preference for the “asexual” state, to the point of not wanting to discover whether it is due to a correctable condition, seems to confirm that.

 

[Mintaka]

The Church doesn’t define people by their current sexual preferences. And frankly, that’s a good thing. Very few young people – heck, very few people – really understand what is going on with their minds and bodies, and they tend to generalize based on what their current interests or temptations are. They have no idea what might happen to them in five months or five years. People are also notoriously unable to tell whether they will ever want children from how they feel about kids right now. Most people figure this stuff out when the time comes.

On to another topic!

Josephite marriages are not about asexual people living together romantically. It’s just a form of religious life that is lived at home. Traditionally, it was associated with people who already had made vows but who for some reason could not join a religious community, or with people who needed to protect each other from being forced into marriage instead of religious life.

Other than Mary and Joseph, the oldest known story of Josephite marriage was St. Jerome’s Life of Malchus, where a young monk named Malchus who left his desert community found himself kidnapped and enslaved by Bedouins, beyond the borders of the Roman Empire. Malchus began to live out his monk vows again while a slave. His master rewarded him one year.with a slave wife, and Malchus decided that he’d have to kill himself in order to keep from breaking his vows. (It took a while for the Church to convince Gentile Christians that they shouldn’t be killing themselves to escape coercion, as you’ll find out if you read St. Ambrose or other very early stuff.)

But his new “bride” informed him that actually she planned to kill herself, because she was already married when she was kidnapped into slavery, and had no desire to break her existing marriage vows. So the two of them talked it over, and swore to live as brother and sister. When their master got unhappy that they weren’t pumping out slave babies, the two of them ran away, and God sent a lioness to kill the Bedouins who were trying to hunt them down. The two got back over the border to the Roman Empire and the monk returned to his monastery. Meanwhile, his “wife” found out that her pre-existing husband was dead, so she joined a nearby female monastery. Many years later, St. Jerome met Malchus and his “wife,” who were again living as brother and sister at the monastery, in their extreme old age. (I’m retelling this from memory, but the Life of Malchus is really pretty neat to read.)

There are tons of examples of noblemen and noblewomen who were too important to be allowed by their families to go into religious life, couples living under Muslim or pagan rule that forbade monasteries and convents, etc. That’s your usual Josephite marriage.

The most famous modern Josephite marriage, however, was that of St. Louis Martin and St. Zelie Guerin Martin. They were both middle-aged and both wanted religious life but had been refused by several orders, so they both thought it would be awesome to have a Josephite marriage. As it turned out, after a year or so when their spiritual director finally got them to discern further, and they mutually decided to end the Josephite thing, God was actually calling them to have something like nine children, among whom was St. Therese. Nor was either of them reluctant about it, at that point.

So anyway… Josephite marriage = itsy-bitsy co-ed home monastery. Generally associated with a fair amount of asceticism, too.

Also, it’s called “living as brother and sister” for a reason. Men and women usually don’t live that way permanently; if they plan to do so, they really have to regard each other as brother and sister, not as romantic partners in any way. Monks and nuns don’t do romance, unless they are planning to break their vows.

 

[underacloud]

I think the jury’s still out here on whether sex is necessarily a requirement for marriage…

With some exceptions already discussed (ie Josephite Marriage) I think this comment is misleading. Sex is generally speaking central to the purpose of marriage:

Can. 1096 §1. For matrimonial consent to exist, the contracting parties must be at least not ignorant that marriage is a permanent partnership between a man and a woman ordered to the procreation of offspring by means of some sexual cooperation.

And, as already addressed, even in a Josephite marriage sex cannot be absolutely ruled out - if one spouse wishes to begin conjugal relations, the other must accept that. One cannot validly attempt marriage with a condition that they will never have sex.

I long for romance and a life-partner. I don’t like sex. Heteroromantic asexual. Look it up. That’s the problem.

Yes, problem is the correct word here. A problem that you refuse to attempt to resolve and bristle at the suggestion of correcting.

Have you discussed this with a priest?

What is you own suggested approach, since you reject the opinions and advice offered in this thread?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Misty, please consider what you are bringing to a marriage. You have defined what you want (a partner and a romantic relationship but no sex) but marriage is about serving one’s spouse. It isn’t wrong to decide what one wants, it’s helpful to have self-awareness, but now consider what your spouse would want. Most people want to experience the greatest intimacy with the the one that they love. Marriage is the rightful place for sex. Without sex, there should be a reason for marriage that is for a greater good.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

With some exceptions already discussed (ie Josephite Marriage) I think this comment is misleading. Sex is generally speaking central to the purpose of marriage:

And, as already addressed, even in a Josephite marriage sex cannot be absolutely ruled out - if one spouse wishes to begin conjugal relations, the other must accept that. One cannot validly attempt marriage with a condition that they will never have sex.

Yes, problem is the correct word here. A problem that you refuse to attempt to resolve and bristle at the suggestion of correcting.

Have you discussed this with a priest?

What is you own suggested approach, since you reject the opinions and advice offered in this thread?

Since I am seriously considering coming into the Catholic Church and I may also soon be becoming “serious” with another sexual person, depending on how he feels about this (again, I don’t “date” lightly), I am genuinely curious as to whehter the Church would ever accept a partnership in marriage like this one, I mean officially, legally, etc.

I am also concerned about how my own calling to either marriage or singleness (I think I said “celibacy” where I meant “singleness” several times here earlier) is affected by all this.

That’s why I’m probing this issue so thoroughly here.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

Misty, please consider what you are bringing to a marriage. You have defined what you want (a partner and a romantic relationship but no sex) but marriage is about serving one’s spouse. It isn’t wrong to decide what one wants, it’s helpful to have self-awareness, but now consider what your spouse would want. Most people want to experience the greatest intimacy with the the one that they love. Marriage is the rightful place for sex. Without sex, there should be a reason for marriage that is for a greater good.

But, again, what have I said earlier? I said that I would most definitely consider and take into huge account what the other wanted. I would give him sex if he wanted it, of course, because that would be a need of his. I would have no problem with that. I would not marry him if he couldn’t deal with my own issues as I wouldn’t want to put him through having to deal with them if he didn’t think he could and/or be happy in the relationship doing so.

Believe it or not, folks, I am a very self-sacrificial person on many levels. I am strongly INFJ and even arguably empathic, highly sensitive to and moved by others’ emotions. I am fiercely protective of others and very loyal. It’s not like I always just focus on myself, if that’s the impression I’m apparently giving here. It even bothers me when I am falsely accused of being self-centered in nature. Talk to anyone who knows me and they will tell you differently. It hurts me deeply because my sensitivity to others is a huge part of my life when I am falsely accused of self-centeredness.

 

[underacloud]

Since I am seriously considering coming into the Catholic Church and I may also soon be becoming “serious” with another sexual person, depending on how he feels about this (again, I don’t “date” lightly), I am genuinely curious as to whehter the Church would ever accept a partnership in marriage like this one, I mean officially, legally, etc.

I am also concerned about how my own calling to either marriage or singleness (I think I said “celibacy” where I meant “singleness” several times here earlier) is affected by all this.

That’s why I’m probing this issue so thoroughly here.

Fair enough.

But that doesn’t really answer my question - what is your own suggestion?

If you are dating someone who you describe as sexual, what does (or will) he think? This isn’t simply a Catholic issue. Even if you can resolve the Canon Law issues, or choose not to convert (hopefully not), the practical issues remain. Even in a secular marriage, this is a huge issue that could be impossible to overcome.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

Fair enough.

But that doesn’t really answer my question - what is your own suggestion?

If you are dating someone who you describe as sexual, what does (or will) he think? This isn’t simply a Catholic issue. Even if you can resolve the Canon Law issues, or choose not to convert (hopefully not), the practical issues remain. Even in a secular marriage, this is a huge issue that could be impossible to overcome.

Well, my asexuality has already come up in discussion and, for a time, I actually thought he might be asexual as well but he told me during this discussion that he was not and that he would desire a sexual relationship. Though we have not made anything even regarding dating official (yet?), he does seem drawn to me, if you understand my meaning, possibly in a romantic way even with all this in mind.

My “solution” would simply be for both parties to give the issue the most serious of consideration, again, possibly for years beforehand, to discus all possible scenarios we could think of, to discuss how we would (if we would) agree to handle them. It would, I think, be very case-dependent and very personal for the both of us. We would ultimately decide what was best based on this careful and lengthy consideration.

Please note that, even though I often second-guess it, I generally have a very good sense of people’s emotional states both within themselves and toward others. Though I question my own “reading” of such things, I am very very often accurate in them. (Again, the sensitivity thing.)

 

[underacloud]

I would give him sex if he wanted it, of course, because that would be a need of his.

What he will want is not just sex. He will want intimacy. He will want a mutually enjoyable sexual experience. He will want more than just you lying there tolerating it (and eventually resenting it and him).

Believe it or not, folks, I am a very self-sacrificial person on many levels.

Would your self-sacrificial nature include the possibility of determining whether your asexual feelings could be changed? Would your sensitivity to others extend as far as exploring this possibility for the sake of your husband?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

But, again, what have I said earlier? I said that I would most definitely consider and take into huge account what the other wanted. I would give him sex if he wanted it, of course, because that would be a need of his. I would have no problem with that. I would not marry him if he couldn’t deal with my own issues as I wouldn’t want to put him through having to deal with them if he didn’t think he could and/or be happy in the relationship doing so.

Believe it or not, folks, I am a very self-sacrificial person on many levels. I am strongly INFJ and even arguably empathic, highly sensitive to and moved by others’ emotions. I am fiercely protective of others and very loyal. It’s not like I always just focus on myself, if that’s the impression I’m apparently giving here. It even bothers me when I am falsely accused of being self-centered in nature. Talk to anyone who knows me and they will tell you differently. It hurts me deeply because my sensitivity to others is a huge part of my life when I am falsely accused of self-centeredness.

I don’t think anyone is accusing you of selfishness. However, you still seem to be looking for something that is contrary to marriage. I think someone said it earlier that a descent person doesn’t want to make love to someone who really doesn’t want to be doing it, especially all the time. Occasionally one spouse may be tired or just not in the mood but they are able to push through and enjoy sex with their spouse. Would you enjoy sex or would you just tolerate it?

If I fell in love with someone asexual I would consider what the above. I would hate that he was just going through the motions. Sex is about bringing the other pleasure and intimacy but of course it’s about receiving pleasure and intimacy; one has to give and receive. How would he receive that if I know he really isn’t into it? Every time. And the more I wanted sex the more I was wanting something he didn’t. I can’t think of anything that would undermine intimacy faster.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

What he will want is not just sex. He will want intimacy. He will want a mutually enjoyable sexual experience. He will want more than just you lying there tolerating it (and eventually resenting it and him).

Would your self-sacrificial nature include the possibility of determining whether your asexual feelings could be changed? Would your sensitivity to others extend as far as exploring this possibility for the sake of your husband?

(Also, there is no way that this issue would ever prevent me from converting, to be sure!)

And, my friend, it is not that simple. sigh If I were to “take something” for my “condition” (as you style it), would I truly remain me? If I were to “fix myself”, would I possibly be going against some special “design” for me by God which, again, may eve relate to some form of calling? There are a lot of questions t consider first before drugging myself up to “make myself want it”. It’s not just that one-step simple process that you seem to want to make it out to be. I’m sorry, but it’s just not.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

I don’t think anyone is accusing you of selfishness. However, you still seem to be looking for something that is contrary to marriage. I think someone said it earlier that a descent person doesn’t want to make love to someone who really doesn’t want to be doing it, especially all the time. Occasionally one spouse may be tired or just not in the mood but they are able to push through and enjoy sex with their spouse. Would you enjoy sex or would you just tolerate it?

If I fell in love with someone asexual I would consider what the above. I would hate that he was just going through the motions. Sex is about bringing the other pleasure and intimacy but of course it’s about receiving pleasure and intimacy; one has to give and receive. How would he receive that if I know he really isn’t into it? Every time. And the more I wanted sex the more I was wanting something he didn’t. I can’t think of anything that would undermine intimacy faster.

You make some very good points here.

The thing is, of course, people have natural and good needs and I wouldn’t want to deny that to someone else, unless they were completely and freely willing to give such up.

Also, there are surely other ways (though different ones) to express intimacy. Even close non-sexual contact can do that (at least for me?).

What do you folks think? If you are a sexual person and happened to fall in love with an asexual person, what would you expect of them? Would you force them to “fix themselves” if they had no desire to? Would you ultimately not wish to marry them in the end because of legitimate needs of your own? Would you be willing to give up sex since you know that the other person wouldn’t respond in the way that you would like anyway?

 

[jmjZelie]

There is also the possibility that you may never have the desire for relations, but do find that you can enjoy it with your husband, in the context of marriage. Sometimes that happens with some couples. So the spouse with the typical libido initiates, and then they both enjoy it.

But if you know for a fact that sexual arousal or pleasant sensations is impossible for you, that is a form of female impotence and can lead to injury and lots of hurt feelings. Because a wife’s body must be prepared and adequately aroused, which includes natural lubrication and internal swelling and expansion of the genitals, that allow for her husband to enter her body. This is just a reality of female bodies. If this is impossible for you, then marital relations could be very painful and possibly impossible, such as in the case of vaginismus.

These are just some things to think about.

 

[MysticMissMisty]

There is also the possibility that you may never have the desire for relations, but do find that you can enjoy it with your husband, in the context of marriage. Sometimes that happens with some couples. So the spouse with the typical libido initiates, and then they both enjoy it.

But if you know for a fact that sexual arousal or pleasant sensations is impossible for you, that is a form of female impotence and can lead to injury and lots of hurt feelings. Because a wife’s body must be prepared and adequately aroused, which includes natural lubrication and internal swelling and expansion of the genitals, that allow for her husband to enter her body. This is just a reality of female bodies. If this is impossible for you, then marital relations could be very painful and possibly impossible, such as in the case of vaginismus.

These are just some things to think about.

As far as I know, all the “mechanics” work for me. I don’t want to get into a lot of detail about this here for obvious reasons, but I can experience “sensitive” sensations; I just don’t associate them with pleasure, if that even makes sense. It seems to be very much a mind issue for me. The sensation is there but just not the mental connection to it.

I mean, what you suggested initially is possible, though, again, I’ve never experienced sexual desire in over 30 years for anyone, so I’d consider this rather unlikely. Thing is, would I yet enter into a marriage with even this possibility in mind and then, if I were to find out that it didn’t happen, what would I do then?

 

[underacloud]

(Also, there is no way that this issue would ever prevent me from converting, to be sure!)

And, my friend, it is not that simple. sigh If I were to “take something” for my “condition” (as you style it), would I truly remain me? If I were to “fix myself”, would I possibly be going against some special “design” for me by God which, again, may eve relate to some form of calling? There are a lot of questions t consider first before drugging myself up to “make myself want it”. It’s not just that one-step simple process that you seem to want to make it out to be. I’m sorry, but it’s just not.

The lack of sexual desire could be due to many things. Neither I nor any other poster has indicated a simple process, quick fix, or drug treatment is the answer. Nonetheless, it is something you could explore but seem to refuse. Maybe it is simple; maybe it is very complex; but I see no harm in exploring it.

Would you truly remain you? Sure. If your asexual “condition” is in fact some sort of physical or psychological disorder, then “fixing” it will make you even more the real you.

Conversely, if you do see it as some sort of calling, then surely it is a calling away from marriage and towards something else?

 

[jmjZelie]

As far as I know, all the “mechanics” work for me. I don’t want to get into a lot of detail about this here for obvious reasons, but I can experience “sensitive” sensations; I just don’t associate them with pleasure, if that even makes sense. It seems to be very much a mind issue for me. The sensation is there but just not the mental connection to it.

I mean, what you suggested initially is possible, though, again, I’ve never experienced sexual desire in over 30 years for anyone, so I’d consider this rather unlikely. Thing is, would I yet enter into a marriage with even this possibility in mind and then, if I were to find out that it didn’t happen, what would I do then?

Yes, you make sense and I commend you for your discretion. I was trying to figure out how to phrase things in my post because I know this is an open forum.

This is why I mention that it is possible that a wife with no libido and not ever wanting to initiate for her own benefit, might find that marital relations are pleasant in the context of marriage with a husband she loves. One doesn’t ever have to desire it ahead of time to find it pleasant during and to be happy about it after and find that it promotes intimacy. If the body organs function in a healthy fashion, then the lack of desire can be dealt with.

So I would think that it would help, if you have not already done so, to read up on Catholic teaching on marriage and marital relations. A good online resource is The Way of the Lord Jesus, by Germaine Grisez. It is a several volume work, but it is very easy to find the volume and chapters dealing with marriage and sexuality. Another good resource is Catholic Education Resource Center, also online. They have many articles on marriage and sexuality too.

Learn about Christian marriage then, and see how your feelings are toward this man you are getting to know. I will say that some people are totally grossed out by the idea of sexuality and that then when they meet their future spouse, they find that they are not opposed to it. But they were thankful for their prior aversion, because it helped them remain chaste. If the idea of marital relations continues to make you uncomfortable, then I would agree that marriage is not likely to be your vocation. But if your aversion lessens, even if you never feel desire (some women never feel an ounce of desire until after their marriage is consummated), then I would guess that marriage is still on the table for you.

Another important thing to consider is: how do you feel about pregnancy and having children? Marriage is for the procreation and education of children. And marriage naturally includes sexual relations, which often bring about children. Does the idea of family and home and children bring you joy and anticipation? Or does it make you feel apprehensive.

Again just some things for you to consider. None of my thoughts here are meant to impose, just to try to help you work through this.

(And one personal note that might help you…I have only ever wanted to be so intimate with my own husband. The idea of ever being with anyone else just plain grosses me out, even theoretically in a morally licit context like remarrying as a widow. So maybe your feelings aren’t too unusual, you know?)