Relationship Status

[Colonel Midnight]

Bathroom counters aren't bad either. *polite cough*

Engaged for me, miraculously enough. Getting married next month on the beach in Hawaii...

Cheers,
-CM-

Which island? I'm going to be in Oahu from March 23rd-26th and Maui from the 26th-27th.

Oahu, at Waimanalo Beach, to be precise.

Thanks, Niorah and Officer!! If only I could fill those shoes you're setting out for me...

Cheers,
-CM-

 

[T'Bonz]

Single, M, 20, Romulan. Seeking Cardassian, Klingon, or Orion female. Like long walks on the beach and plotting to destroy the Federation.

Bah. Race traitor. Don't you know, Rihannsu veruul, that you're supposed to be xenophobic? Kids these days...

At least you got the "destroying the Federation" part right.

 

[Myasishchev]

Not a fan of sex in the shower. It's slippery and you'll end up with a concussion. The kitchen table, on the other hand...

My shower, at least, is too small. Additionally, I'm not a huge fan of inhaling tons of steam while I'm exerting myself, and my girlfriend can't stand the minimum water temperature I find pleasant. So forget it.

It's not even especially fun in ideal conditions; I'm convinced the romance attributed to it is nothing more than the triggered memory of softcore scenes seen as children and young adults. And the only reason those exist is because steam and frosted glass obscure genitalia.

Our new porn-whetted generations will rightfully disregard shower sex.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Bah. Race traitor. Don't you know, Rihannsu veruul, that you're supposed to be xenophobic? Kids these days...

At least you got the "destroying the Federation" part right.

I still have a superiority complex, and 2/3 ain't bad.
Plus, relationships make for great alliances. And turning the Cardassians and the Klingons to our side?

PS: You used a Vulcan smiley. I question your dedication to the Star Empire.

He should put an ad up on okcupid with exactly this wording. See what happens.

I should. But I probably won't.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

aww.. just do it for fun and to report back to us. A project!

 

[PlainSimpleJoel]

Congrats to Flux and CM.

Myself - single. Not really looking at the moment for a girlfriend. I was asked a similar question at a high school reunion and I said happily single.

 

[Subcommander R.]

aww.. just do it for fun and to report back to us. A project!

Very well. It has been created.

 

[T'Bonz]

PS: You used a Vulcan smiley. I question your dedication to the Star Empire.

*smiles* Good. You're not *totally* lost.

 

[Amaris]

My relationship status is: Single, not seeing anyone.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

aww.. just do it for fun and to report back to us. A project!

Very well. It has been created.

Good! Did you put up a pic?

 

[Subcommander R.]

aww.. just do it for fun and to report back to us. A project!

Very well. It has been created.

Good! Did you put up a pic?

My avatar from here. In case any of you want to find me there. I'm listed as SubcommanderR

 

[TorontoTrekker]

Single, M, 20, Romulan. Seeking Cardassian, Klingon, or Orion female. Like long walks on the beach and plotting to destroy the Federation.

Aww... if only I were the right orientation, gender, or species...

He should put an ad up on okcupid with exactly this wording. See what happens.

www.gk2gk.com would probably get more results - it's a dating site for science fiction fans, gamers, etc.

Mind you, I came across a profile on OKCupid a couple of months ago in which the guy had uploaded a photo of himself in zombie makeup, so you never know.

And yes, I wrote to him. We exchanged a couple of messages, but I haven't heard from him since I asked him if he wanted to get together for coffee about a month ago. I must have put him off (I seem to do that).

Interestingly, he had told me about a short film he'd been in and sent me a link to it on Youtube. That gave me his full name, so on a whim I looked him up on Facebook (though I didn't send him a friend request, thinking that might appear stalkerish), and it turned out we had a mutual friend - a local horror author. Why am I not surprised?

Not a fan of sex in the shower. It's slippery and you'll end up with a concussion. The kitchen table, on the other hand...

My shower, at least, is too small. Additionally, I'm not a huge fan of inhaling tons of steam while I'm exerting myself, and my girlfriend can't stand the minimum water temperature I find pleasant. So forget it.

It's not even especially fun in ideal conditions; I'm convinced the romance attributed to it is nothing more than the triggered memory of softcore scenes seen as children and young adults. And the only reason those exist is because steam and frosted glass obscure genitalia.

Our new porn-whetted generations will rightfully disregard shower sex.

I don't know. The first time I had sex with my last boyfriend was in the shower... at least for part of it. We started out in the bed, moved to the shower, went back to the bed, then back to the shower again. (It was during Dragon*Con, and Atlanta at Labour Day can get horrifically hot and humid, and my hotel room's air conditioning wasn't the best.)

To answer the question in the poll... I usually consider myself to be divorced, as my ex and I had a wedding ceremony in the United Church of Canada. At the time, same-sex marrriage wasn't legally recognized yet (this was in 1993), but as far as our friends and his family (the less said about my family, the better) were concerned, our marriage was no different from any of theirs, and my employers gave him full spousal benefits (he didn't work). When he left me for the guy he'd been cheating on me with, we had to notify the church. I'm not sure exactly what they did - an annulment, or what - but since it wasn't a legally-recognized relationship, we didn't need to get a legal divorce. However, "divorced" seems to be the easiest way to describe my situation.

Since then there were three I dated for brief periods (each of them broke things off after exact 21 days - I was beginning to think I was cursed), but the next two have been the only ones whom I've seen for any length of time since my divorce. One was about five months, though he stood me up twice and refused to take my phone calls for the last month or so. (He wanted to break up with me but was too chickenshit to actually do it.) The second was the one I met in Atlanta - we dated for about a year and a half, although because of the distance, we were only actually in each other's physical presence four times during that period. Thank the gods for Skype and webcams. (We're actually still friends - we talk once or twice per week.)

As things stand at the moment, though, I've been single for the last year or thereabouts, and there haven't really been too many prospects (the guy from OKCupid notwithstanding). I remember when I used to go out every Friday and Saturday night, but the fact that I rarely met anyone combined with the utter exhaustion I've been suffering from since I started working 90 minutes from home means that I don't really go out much anymore - when I do, it's with friends, so I'm not likely to meet anyone that way. (And if anyone does notice me, they probably assume that I'm involved with the person I'm hanging out with.)

 

[John O.]

You're right. My apologies. I shouldn't have said they were a myth. I suppose there are asexuals out there, like nuns, monks, eunuchs, etc.

Well mainly its hard to believe because of biological drives. Even if there is no drive to reproduce, homosexuals still want to have sex. The fact that there are those who want no part of it in a sexual species its hard to believe.

RAMA

Not so much for me. Certainly that would not be expected to be a large proportion of the population, but in a species that thrives not just on passing of the genes but on ideas as well, such individuals can still be said to serve a purpose even if we only look at it from a biological standpoint without bringing other social and theological points into the discussion.



As for MLB--I don't think that's fair to say his beliefs conflict with reality because they differ from yours and that he is not entitled to practice them. He's not even telling anyone else what they have to do.

The existence of asexuality or celibacy is easy enough to understand, really - in any herd population you're going to get a large distribution of hormonal balances, and the general population is somewhere in the middle where this "biological drive" you refer to is at its median strength and plenty of procreation takes place.

On the fringes you'll have sex addicts and celibates. Through some fluke of genetic mutation, probably in utero, the genetic markers that would develop during puberty to define sex drive developed for below average hormone levels. And since celibacy and the like are motives of the higher brain trying to resist the urges of the lower brain, the lower sex drive allows such a motive to succeed. I'm not saying celibacy doesn't take a conscious sacrifice, but on average a person who successfully suppresses the urge to procreate undoubtedly has less predominant hormonal response in their bodies.

 

[scotpens]

On the fringes you'll have sex addicts and celibates. Through some fluke of genetic mutation, probably in utero, the genetic markers that would develop during puberty to define sex drive developed for below average hormone levels. And since celibacy and the like are motives of the higher brain trying to resist the urges of the lower brain, the lower sex drive allows such a motive to succeed. I'm not saying celibacy doesn't take a conscious sacrifice, but on average a person who successfully suppresses the urge to procreate undoubtedly has less predominant hormonal response in their bodies.

Asexuality or celibacy isn’t necessarily a matter of “motive” or “conscious sacrifice.” Some people simply don’t feel sexual desire. As for the need to procreate, some people absolutely can’t stand children.

 

[John O.]

On the fringes you'll have sex addicts and celibates. Through some fluke of genetic mutation, probably in utero, the genetic markers that would develop during puberty to define sex drive developed for below average hormone levels. And since celibacy and the like are motives of the higher brain trying to resist the urges of the lower brain, the lower sex drive allows such a motive to succeed. I'm not saying celibacy doesn't take a conscious sacrifice, but on average a person who successfully suppresses the urge to procreate undoubtedly has less predominant hormonal response in their bodies.

Asexuality or celibacy isn’t necessarily a matter of “motive” or “conscious sacrifice.” Some people simply don’t feel sexual desire. As for the need to procreate, some people absolutely can’t stand children.

You misunderstood me. I didn't define all asexuality as celibacy, I explained celibacy and asexuality via variable hormone levels. Those who don't feel sexual desire aren't just exactly like everybody else - there's different neurochemistry going on in their brain. Celibacy would be optional asexuality aided by a predisposition for it.

Being unable to stand children is in my experience just a product of exposure to poorly behaved children, which is the same thing as being exposed to poorly raised adults who later have children. People don't start out having a positive or negative impression of children from an adult perspective, that develops after experiences. Lacking the impulse to have children is an entirely different concept than actively feeling compelled not to. If you lack the impulse but are exposed to well behaved, well adjusted children - biologically speaking, you're likely than not to come away from that experience with a more favorable perception of the practical realities of being around children even if there is still the lack of a biological impulse.

But I don't think there are that many people who genuinely lack the impulse to have children and will always lack the impulse to have children. Women under the age of, oh, say 35, can't say they're certain they will never want children. A woman's hormonal balance of body and mind are still changing well into her 30's, and I can't tell you how many women I've known swear in their early 20's they have NO INTEREST in children pull a complete 180 by 30.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I do like kids, and I admit I do feel an impulse (of sorts) to be a dad. Ultimately, though, I've decided I would suck at it - I mean I know precisely sod-all about what it takes to be a dad. In the end I just don't think I could handle the responsibility. So in this case realism outweighs the impulse.

And again, I am not asexual. I do want to have sex. Just not *first*.

 

[scotpens]

. . . Being unable to stand children is in my experience just a product of exposure to poorly behaved children, which is the same thing as being exposed to poorly raised adults who later have children.

I’m sure there are plenty of well-behaved children aged four or five and older. The problem is, they have to go through the infant and toddler stages first.

But I don't think there are that many people who genuinely lack the impulse to have children and will always lack the impulse to have children.

You’re talking to one of them. When it comes to kids, I make W.C. Fields look like Danny Kaye.

I do like kids, and I admit I do feel an impulse (of sorts) to be a dad. Ultimately, though, I've decided I would suck at it - I mean I know precisely sod-all about what it takes to be a dad. In the end I just don't think I could handle the responsibility.

Have you considered getting a cat?

And again, I am not asexual. I do want to have sex. Just not *first*.

Does “first” mean before marriage? Before dinner? Or before hello?

 

[MetalPants]

How's this for complicated...

I am involved with this girl, but am waiting for her divorce to come through to move beyond the kissing and holding hands stage.

 

[RJDiogenes]

On the fringes you'll have sex addicts and celibates.

We prefer the term "sex enthusiast."

 

[Amaris]

On the fringes you'll have sex addicts and celibates.

We prefer the term "sex enthusiast."

I prefer "Sex Aficionado".