I don't understand the difference between this salarian romance and simply having a salarian friend.
I'd imagine that although romance with Salarian isn't likely sexual, it can be romantic. Partnership, closeness, cuddling and sleeping together, probably things like that.
(One’s partner in this sort of relationship would be referred to as one’s zucchini.) It involves a much deeper level of affection
Once I got to this part about deep zucchini affection, I had to stop reading because I fell off the train of thought
I'd imagine that although romance with Salarian isn't likely sexual, it can be romantic. Partnership, closeness, cuddling and sleeping together, probably things like that.
"Cuddling" releases chemicals associated with sexual activity such as oxytocin. I doubt an asexual would find such an activity inherently pleasurable, assuming the condition is based upon actual chemical disabilities.
The other 3 things are all found in platonic friendships and relationships. Have you never shared a bed with, parents/ siblings or had a sleepover?
Have you never shared a bed with a sibling or had a sleepover?
This one time at band practice Dave's pit bulls were going at it, and he clapped his hands and yelled at them "Mongo! Quit $#@%ing your sister!"
To which I replied, "I wish I had a sister"
It was one of those funny because true kind of things
I should go
This one time at band practice Dave's pit bulls were going at it, and he clapped his hands and yelled at them "Mongo! Quit $#@%ing your sister!"
To which I replied, "I wish I had a sister"
It was one of those funny because true kind of things
I should go
Ahh, the unfortunate symptoms of being a member of a species having a 9/1 M:F ratio
If It's any consolation I didn't have a sister either because of the Flotilla's one child policies. Denied a minion to take all the blame for my toy surgery antics in childhood.....yet another reason to hate the toasters.
"Cuddling" releases chemicals associated with sexual activity such as oxytocin. I doubt an asexual would find such an activity inherently pleasurable, assuming the condition is based upon actual chemical disabilities.
The other 3 things are all found in platonic friendships and relationships. Have you never shared a bed with, parents/ siblings or had a sleepover?
Cuddling can be somewhat sexual and it also can be just romantic. I think romantic is what we are going for here.
Yes when I was kid. Not anymore as adult.
Romantic relationship is simply has more to it than just sexual aspects so that is why romance with Salarian might work.
Clearly the OP has not seen what Salarian tongues are truly capable of
They used to eat flies.
They used to eat flies.
And now they eat mmmhmmmmmm
Cuddling can be somewhat sexual and it also can be just romantic. I think romantic is what we are going for here.
Yes when I was kid. Not anymore as adult.
Romantic relationship is simply has more to it than just sexual aspects so that is why romance with Salarian might work.
What is the distinction? If oxytocin and dopamine aren't being released than it is by definition non sexual physically. The participants aren't feeling pleasure by participating in it, so the only reason to engage in it would be because the practice is a socialized norm for romantic relationships due to the vast majority experiencing sexual pleasure in doing it.
That's more due to the stigmatization of sleeping in close proximity to others being inheriently romantic when it is between two adults, when that isn't at all the case. Sometimes there simply aren't enough beds for everyone to have their own. Is it "romantic" to sleep in the same tent as a friend or confidant, for instance, or to share beds because it is cheaper to rent less rooms/ apartments?
I don't think it does, and frankly don't see the difference between the described nonsexual "romance" and any other platonic relationship. Any "asexual" relationship that engages in cuddling or other such physical intimacy for pleasure is probably not so due to any chemical or physical reasons, but because of social hangups on sex.
I'd extend this to all asexual "romances". If there is sex involved (whether currently or at an unspecified date in the future), than it isn't asexual (even if one of the participants is). If neither is engaging in sexual activity (as would probably be the case between an asexual human and a salarian), than what is the difference between it simply being a platonic friendship?
Shep and Mordin were BFF's for me in ME2, and went everywhere together, but I don't think either of them wanted to bang. Indeed Mordin will "reject" you if you talk to him too many times without taking a romantic interest in someone else
If a couple is together for years but decide to wait to have a sexual encounter until marriage because of religious reasons, is their relationship only "friendship" until their genitals meet?
If a married couple are together for twenty years, and one spouse ends up in a car accident that paralyzes them and leaves them unable to have physical sexual congress, are they no longer in a romantic relationship? Are they now just friends?
I've been married for ten years. I've been friends with my best friend/best man for twenty. If my wife were suddenly unable to have physical sex with me because of a medical condition, I can guarantee that the two relationships would be in absolutely no way comparable.
If two people were able to create a personal, emotional and societal bond that is similar to that, then what they do or don't do with their genitals is really inconsequential. A lot of people just happen to forge that bond because of society's views towards fecundity. But much in the same way a mind-blowing one night stand doesn't make a relationship, a relationship doesn't necessarily need to be defined by sex.
"Cuddling" releases chemicals associated with sexual activity such as oxytocin. I doubt an asexual would find such an activity inherently pleasurable, assuming the condition is based upon actual chemical disabilities.
The other 3 things are all found in platonic friendships and relationships. Have you never shared a bed with, parents/ siblings or had a sleepover?
IGNORANCE ALERT. It's not about chemical disabilities.
It doesn't really matter how you define an asexual relationship, or what you think an asexual relationship entails. You don't get to define other people's sexuality for them. Your 'doubts' are irrelevant, in light of the fact that many Asexual people have expressed their enjoyment of cuddling/physical contact.
You should really do some actual research (listen to what asexual people tell you, information via rectal pull doesn't count) before proclaiming yourself an expert on asexual romance.
If a couple is together for years but decide to wait to have a sexual encounter until marriage because of religious reasons, is their relationship only "friendship" until their genitals meet?
of course not, assuming they both know the intention of the relationship, hence "at an unspecified date in the future".
If a married couple are together for twenty years, and one spouse ends up in a car accident that paralyzes them and leaves them unable to have physical sexual congress, are they no longer in a romantic relationship? Are they now just friends?
No, and in that case the sexual attraction probably didn't simply cease to exist just because it is now more difficult to perform acts of sexual intimacy (assuming the will is still there at all for both partners)
I've been married for ten years. I've been friends with my best friend/best man for twenty. If my wife were suddenly unable to have physical sex with me because of a medical condition, I can guarantee that the two relationships would be in absolutely no way comparable.
probably not, then again you are describing a relationship where neither of you are asexuals. It isn't really analogous. Asexuality is a medical condition resulting in the lack of a sex drive, seperate from abstention from sexual activity either due to social or even physical reasons (religion, distance, physical disability etc).
If two people were able to create a personal, emotional and societal bond that is similar to that, then what they do or don't do with their genitals is really inconsequential. A lot of people just happen to forge that bond because of society's views towards fecundity. But much in the same way a mind-blowing one night stand doesn't make a relationship, a relationship doesn't necessarily need to be defined by sex.
The intended functions of the genitals don't exclusively define human (or in this case alien) sexuality. It is also encompasses neurochemical processes and fixed action patterns (instincts). If those processes truly aren't physically present in an individual, than neither should the sexual behaviors based upon them (i.e. "cuddling" as an example).
Romantic relations are defined by sex or sexual activity. If there is none, there ceases to be a distinction with platonic relationships, and therefore the two terms are redundant.
IGNORANCE ALERT. It's not about chemical disabilities.
It doesn't really matter how you define an asexual relationship, or what you think an asexual relationship entails. You don't get to define other people's sexuality for them. Your 'doubts' are irrelevant, in light of the fact that many Asexual people have expressed their enjoyment of cuddling/physical contact.
You should really do some actual research (listen to what asexual people tell you, information via rectal pull doesn't count) before proclaiming yourself an expert on asexual romance.
Pardon me for asking scientific questions, but don't call me "ignorant" simply because you can't elucidate on them. I'm not attempting to define anyone's sexuality, I'm simply using the empirical physical definition of asexual as the physical lack of sexual attraction, which is distinct from celibacy or abstention, both of which are chosen behavioral traits.
If someone enjoys cuddling/ physical contact as a result of oxytocin release, than they are not asexual, they are simply celibate. I do plenty of research, and it doesn't involve listening to random people who have no scientific knowledge and are in actuality the ones performing "rectal pull".
I'm not at all an expert on asexual "romance". The concept seems an oxymoron to me based on my understanding of human sexuality and sociology, that's why I'm asking the questions.
I am pretty sure some have gone off the deep end in this thread.
I'm not at all an expert on asexual "romance". The concept seems an oxymoron to me based on my understanding of human sexuality and sociology, that's why I'm asking the questions.
I imagine anybody would be hard pressed to find a professional who is an expert on asexual romance. Honestly the whole concept does not make any sense logically.
You know. I wonder about the actual number of asexual people. Homosexuality is already a small number, but considering how few people who defined themselves as asexual, demisexual, etc. Those people would likely also have a preference toward either the same sex or the opposite sex, males and females, which divide them even smaller in number. With homosexuals, they could at least get some press and attention and controversy, as well as 10% of population of homosexual and bisexual who could be interested in the game. There is just no benefit that could outweigh the cost for doing such a romance. It wouldn't generate as much controversy or attention if no one knows or cares about asexuality. I know people who don't even know asexual people exist. It basically doesn't generate enough publicity or improve the image or enough revenue for, especially, EA to justify the inclusion. I personally don't get asexuals, but there are people who don't get homosexuals or bisexuals as well, so it's not really my place to speak. It's not a coincidence that it takes 3 games to include gay romance in the game or how slanted toward straight males is in ME3. Bioware is a game company and it's also under EA. Their priority is to make money, so I'm guessing people can make all these threads about censoring or toggle off violence or asexual, demisexual. In the end, I feel like it's pretty fruitless, and people who don't get it will either mock the thread or ignore it and Bioware would not include them without any sufficient incentive.
You know. I wonder about the actual number of asexual people. Homosexuality is already a small number, but considering how few people who defined themselves as asexual, demisexual, etc. Those people would likely also have a preference toward either the same sex or the opposite sex, males and females, which divide them even smaller in number. With homosexuals, they could at least get some press and attention and controversy, as well as 10% of population of homosexual and bisexual who could be interested in the game. There is just no benefit that could outweigh the cost for doing such a romance. It wouldn't generate as much controversy or attention if no one knows or cares about asexuality. I know people who don't even know asexual people exist. It basically doesn't generate enough publicity or improve the image or enough revenue for, especially, EA to justify the inclusion. I personally don't get asexuals, but there are people who don't get homosexuals or bisexuals as well, so it's not really my place to speak. It's not a coincidence that it takes 3 games to include gay romance in the game or how slanted toward straight males is in ME3. Bioware is a game company and it's also under EA. Their priority is to make money, so I'm guessing people can make all these threads about censoring or toggle off violence or asexual, demisexual. In the end, I feel like it's pretty fruitless, and people who don't get it will either mock the thread or ignore it and Bioware would not include them without any sufficient incentive.
To be fair, the same could be said about including alien romances. 0% of the fanbase have had sex with aliens (get your jokes ready, people), so what would be the point of adding non-human romances? Yet the three most popular romances have all been aliens. I dunno.
When I was a younger man I probably would have agreed with the "it's just a friendship" crowd. But I've gotten to a point where I can examine myself and take measure of myself better than I could then.
I've been in love more than a couple of times, and I can say that while sexual attraction has always been a part of it, an important part, that if that part was removed from the equation, I'm able to recognize that the way I felt for those individuals is different from the way I feel towards even my closest friends. There's a level of intimacy - not physical intimacy, but emotional intimacy - beyond what I share with my friends that I could share with them
So, yeah, I'm at the point where I can recognize that there can be a romantic connection without a sexual attraction.
To be fair, the same could be said about including alien romances. 0% of the fanbase have had sex with aliens (get your jokes ready, people), so what would be the point of adding non-human romances? Yet the three most popular romances have all been aliens. I dunno.
Aliens still have a gender males and females. People are still attracted to the masculinity and femininity from those. They are essentially humans in mask. There is a reason why aliens like elcor or hanar are not romanceable in term of removing too far away from a typical human and even gender. Asari is basically humans with blue skin, and it adds to the exotic nature of space and fantasy when romancing humanoids, which are essentially still "humans" in term of behavior and personality and still look essentially male or female in term of anatomy, especially Asari. It's no different from romancing elf, dwarf, or qunari. They don't not exist in real life, but they behave like humans and gender specific. The difference is basically is cosmetic.
<snip>
You do realize that you don't have to be Asexual to be in a relationship with someone who is Asexual, right?
You do realize that you don't have to be Asexual to be in a relationship with someone who is Asexual, right?
And I don't want my character to be with an asexual because I don't get it and I nor my character would be happy in such a relationship. I can only speak for myself but such a relationship would be very difficult to maintain, especially for a lot of sexual people who place a lot of emphasis on sex. Many marriages have been broken over sexual incompatibility.
...Actually, I don't think it's said anywhere in the Mass Effect trilogy that Turians are mammals. If you know something I don't, I'd appreciate a link, because I can't find anything on Turian's having mammal physiology. Anyways, as I said, biology would be irrelevant as the relationship isn't about sex.
Also, considering the fact that we've actually witnessed Salarian relationships in the game (Asari-Salarian couple) a Salarian's short lifespan and quick emotional processing is not the issue.
Well, even if it is not clearly stated, it appears obvious that turians are mammals, if only for the fact that garrus might have sex with female shepard. And an intercourse between a mammal and a non-mammal would simply be IMPOSSIBLE.
As for the rest....you quoted a relationship between a race with a very short life span with a race with a very long life span. So, salarians process emotions very quickly, and asaris are ''emotionally mature'' enough for knowing that detah is unavoidable.
So, you quoted a special exception of what i said: a relationship between a human and a salarian would be impossible, in my opinion.
And I don't want my character to be with an asexual because I don't get it and I nor my character would be happy in such a relationship. I can only speak for myself but such a relationship would be very difficult to maintain, especially for a lot of sexual people who place a lot of emphasis on sex. Many marriages have been broken over sexual incompatibility.
Asexuality is a medical condition resulting in the lack of a sex drive, seperate from abstention from sexual activity either due to social or even physical reasons (religion, distance, physical disability etc).Romantic relations are defined by sex or sexual activity. If there is none, there ceases to be a distinction with platonic relationships, and therefore the two terms are redundant.Pardon me for asking scientific questions, but don't call me "ignorant" simply because you can't elucidate on them. I'm not attempting to define anyone's sexuality, I'm simply using the empirical physical definition of asexual as the physical lack of sexual attraction, which is distinct from celibacy or abstention, both of which are chosen behavioral traits.
If someone enjoys cuddling/ physical contact as a result of oxytocin release, than they are not asexual, they are simply celibate. I do plenty of research, and it doesn't involve listening to random people who have no scientific knowledge and are in actuality the ones performing "rectal pull".
I'm not at all an expert on asexual "romance". The concept seems an oxymoron to me based on my understanding of human sexuality and sociology, that's why I'm asking the questions.
I can't say I've ever had any interest in pursuing a romance arc with a Salarian.
I most certainly do support non-sexual romance, though. In fact, I'd quite like it if more (or all) of the romances were left ambiguous in terms of if / when / where / how sex occurs. It allows much greater role-playing freedom and flexibility.
I really like what DA:O did - not the sex scenes, but the fact that further intimacy was left open. My warden could approach Leliana in camp any time afterward, choose the line about going to bed, at which point you would see the back of the warden's head as they approached each other, presumably to kiss.
With a voiced protag, I could see the writers providing half a dozen or so different intimate dialogue choices which would end in a kiss / embrace, then fade-to-black. Those same dialogue options would be always available, once the relationship had progressed to a certain point. Much more role-playing freedom, and it would get the relationships out of the formulaic rut.
Then you can either:
-- Not pursue that relationship
-- Role-play an asexual character
-- Headcanon that the pair work out some mutually satisfactory arrangement
And that would be to gripe it to satisfy the very few minority of minority with no payout in either revenue or publicity, which I already said would make no sense for a business.
With fade to black option alongside with a sexual one, then the asexual people could do the same. It's something Bioware already stated they would work into the game.
Retour en haut
