Sex Therapy 101 with Cami Hurst
Welcome to Sex Therapy 101 with your host Cami Hurst. This is the sexiest podcast in the west for all the right reasons. Cami sits down with amazing experts in the field of sexual health and counseling to learn, converse and add her own expert voice to the conversation. Cuddle up with your partner and get ready to have your love life feel more complete.
Sex Therapy 101 with Cami Hurst
Including Asexuality in the Conversation with Aubri Lancaster
Aubri Lancaster shares her expertise on asexuality and consent, introducing frameworks like "favor vs. chore" and the spectrum from sex-favorable to sex-repulsed that apply to everyone regardless of orientation. She challenges our cultural understanding of intimacy and desire, offering practical tools for healthier relationships.
• Understanding consenting to unwanted sex - acknowledging when sex is consensual yet still unwanted
• Favor vs. chore framework - distinguishing between freely given acts and obligatory ones with consequences
• Consent tools including negotiation, safe words, and aftercare should be used in all sexual contexts, not just kink
• The spectrum from sex-favorable to sex-repulsed exists for everyone in different contexts
• Compulsory sexuality creates pressure that impacts everyone, especially asexual individuals
• Unbraiding different forms of intimacy (emotional, intellectual, sensual) creates more options
• Questioning the pathologization of low desire through diagnoses like HSDD
• Creating relationships where "a no is as welcome as a yes"
Aubri Lancaster is an AASECT and ANTE UP! Certified Sexuality Educator. As a Greyromantic Asexual Jewish Femme, Aubri has lived experience and a connection to the Asexual and Aromantic communities that provides a unique perspective on the issues facing the changing landscape of sexuality and orientation. Aubri's services can be found at AceSexEducation.com including workshops, consulting, and training. She also offers free content on IG & TikTok at @AceSexEducation. When not working, Aubri spends her time with her spouse, her friends, her 8 year old, and her three adorable Chihuahuas.
Find Aubri Lancaster at www.acesexeducation.com
Hello, sex Therapy 101. Friends, you notice I might have taken a break, but we're back and we're excited and I'm really passionate about this new series that I'm going to be offering to all of you. I haven't disappeared. I've been working on some projects that are really going to be offering to all of you. I haven't disappeared. I've been working on some projects that are really meaningful to me, and one of those is a book for the public about my research about regarding long-term outcomes of consenting to unwanted sex, or duty sex as we sometimes call it, and in doing that, adding to my own research over the year, you'll see my hair change, my face change, because these were all recorded over the course of a year and I wanted to talk to experts about the cultural implications or cultural beliefs or the cultural ideas among different communities in the US that might protect people against negative outcomes and that might actually kind of promote people into some of the more negative outcomes. And that is the series I have to offer you. I'm really excited. It's been really meaningful to me, it's been enlightening to me, it's really helped me make sure that this book is what I want it to be for all of you. So, with no ado, here we go. This is going to be the intro for the whole series. I'll give you a little bit of a bio for each and then we'll jump into the recording of the interview.
Speaker 1:In this interview, I have a conversation with Aubrey Lancaster. It was really important to me to make sure we made this distinction about orientation. Aubrey is an ASEC certified sexuality educator. Her focus is in asexuality, aromanticism and the mechanics of arousal. She's also a secular, jewish, non-divergent, gray, romantic, asexual femme, and it's fantastic to have this conversation with her and get her input on a conversation that we need to put a seat at the table for this population, and I'm really happy to have learned from her and hope that you find it stimulating as well.
Speaker 1:So I wanted to have this conversation with you because I don't want to put a book out there about desire and not acknowledge this very valid human experience, and I didn't just want to like pretend it didn't exist or didn't apply to this discussion. So I appreciate you being willing to teach me and to talk through all this. Okay, so let's start Question one Using your clinical lens the way that you're trained to look at sexuality how would you interpret my research findings and how would you explain what I demonstrated, that we found with these 1,300 women?
Speaker 2:You know, I just really appreciated the language of consenting to unwanted sex. Just being able to name that, I think, is so huge because there is this push that it's either fully consensual, enthusiastic yes, or it's sexual assault, and no discussion of what that in-between can look like. And I really appreciated especially that element of recognizing that some people may not call it assault, may not feel that it was non-consensual, and yet it was still unwanted, and I thought that was really important to be able to name that and I'm absolutely going to be bringing that into my work. The other stuff that stood out to me was being able to name all of the different emotional responses people had to consenting to unwanted sex. Because, again, being able to name these things and say, you know, even if you fully consented, you heart of hearts consented, there was still negative impact, and being able to hold both of those truths at once yeah, and then even to recognize that some of them consented and didn't feel there was any negative impact, yeah, and that's a niche I think can be explored a lot more too. Yeah, where I would go with that and what I expand on that is when I talk about some of these elements, especially for asexual people.
Speaker 2:Some asexual people do want to engage in sexual activity. It just may not be motivated by sexual attraction, and some asexual people have no interest in sexual activity with another person, maybe with themselves or maybe not. So a lot of asexual people, I think, find themselves in that space that if they want to have a romantic partner, they must expect that they will be consenting to sex. So I think that there are probably a lot of asexual people who are in mixed orientation relationships, who are consenting to unwanted sex. Yeah, and again, we can look at that in a couple of different ways as far as whether or not that is a problem for them. Yeah, this is where I bring in the language of favor versus chore.
Speaker 1:Okay, oh, okay.
Speaker 2:Yeah, Okay, you could do a favor for somebody and it doesn't mean that you particularly got anything out of it by doing it, but you know that they enjoyed it and you're happy to do it. A favor is freely given and if you don't have the capacity and you say no, there's no consequences. You just move on. They figure out what they need to do about it. A chore is expected and there are consequences if you don't do a chore. So I often will talk to people about how to kind of locate that for themselves. You know, is this a chore? Is it freely given? You know, like I don't like cooking, but I get satisfaction out of knowing that the food that I've made is being enjoyed. So somebody who is consenting to unwanted sex can still get satisfaction out of making their partner happy, out of giving that gift to their partner.
Speaker 1:I like this language because, though, sullivan was using language like approach or avoidance motivations, but I don't know that the everyday person is going to get that, but I like your language, which is much more understandable of favor versus chore. Yeah, it's much more accessible.
Speaker 2:And then we can also kind of transfer that over into those understandings of capacity. What do we do if there is a request and we don't have the capacity for it? So I don't have the capacity to make dinner tonight. What are our options? Either my partner makes it or we eat out, or we just fend for ourselves and get our own food. So that same thing again can transfer over into a sexual setting of if somebody asks for a sexual favor and the other person doesn't have the capacity for it or doesn't want to. First of all there has to be conversations around handling rejection, handling a no, not taking it personally. So there's a lot of that and that can be a huge point of discussion.
Speaker 1:I like how you highlighted it that there needs to be some discussions here and some options and looking at some negotiation. That's like not coercive but is what are our options?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think the kink community gives us a lot of really great language that we assume is only within that context, but I think all of that can so importantly be used in any sexual encounter. Negotiation, consent, safe words, aftercare yeah, all of that needs to be taught in all sexual contexts, and everything else too. I mean, if you're going to be in a highly activated, intense situation, you need to know how to stop it, how to take care of yourself when it's over, all of those sorts of things. And I think that for those who are consenting to unwanted sex, who want to consent for some reason where it's not coerced, those are things that can help mitigate those negative feelings that come out of it.
Speaker 1:Mm-hmm, some of that aftercare, right, yeah, but I mean all of that. You can totally use that better. Yeah, yeah, the negotiation.
Speaker 2:What are we going to actually do? What are we going to engage in? It's not going to be a surprise. Here is what.
Speaker 1:I am agreeing to.
Speaker 2:Here are my boundaries, here my boundaries. Here's what I don't want to do. Let's do our thing and then afterwards we can debrief and have a conversation about what worked, what didn't, and maybe create a new menu of things to try.
Speaker 1:And it's so valuable. Do you see that language permeating from the kink community into the larger, into other communities, Like I totally agree with you and I'm wondering, into other?
Speaker 2:communities. Like I totally agree with you and I'm wondering what do you see? I don't see it enough. Like I really see that mostly discussed with people who are doing work around kink Consent is talked about in multiple spaces. Um, I really there's a couple of things around consent that I find helpful in the context of consenting to unwanted sex.
Speaker 2:first of all, um betty martin's wheel of consent I know she's so great the the simple concept of understanding who the touch is for, yeah, I think is huge, especially, um, within that context of consenting to unwanted sex. If somebody is consenting to receive touch and is told it's for them but it's not, it's for the person doing the touching being able to explore that and play those little games. Because, you know, one of the things that really stood out for me in the Wheel of Consent book was how she talked about there would be a moment when they're playing these games where it would suddenly click. You know they would be saying, well, what do you want to do? No, no, no, it's not about you, it's about you know. Well, what do you want to do? No, no, no, it's not about you, it's about you know, it's not about them, it's about you. How do you want to be touched? And they wouldn't really get it at first, and then, after actually doing it, it would hit a point where they're like, oh, oh.
Speaker 2:So I think that in and of itself can really help people to recognize if they are consenting to something unwanted or not. Asexual men and men who have a lower desire than their partners get not only all of that as well, but there's also this challenge to their masculinity, that gets tied into it. Yeah, you know, when masculinity is defined by virility and sexual prowess and all of these things, any step in the other direction on any of that is very shamed and not talked about. So you know, I definitely would love to see some of these numbers for men who consent to unwanted sex, right.
Speaker 1:I agree, I'm interested too. I can't do all the studies at once, I know, but they need to be done.
Speaker 2:Yeah. And then the other tool around consent that I find really useful is Emily Nagoski's four levels of consent. Are you familiar with that one? Thanks for bringing that up. Yeah, enthusiastic, willing, unwilling and coerced. And it's that willing level that gets so misunderstood, because we have this idea of what enthusiastic consent looks like and we can sometimes at least identify coerced consent, although not always, but especially willing. Why would you just be willing and not enthusiastic? And that's when it comes down to. There are many different reasons people will have sex beyond their own personal desires. You know, and while I also think it's super important to reiterate you don't owe anyone sex, ever, you don't owe anybody access to your body, ever, partner or not. This is not a service you are required to perform. Sex is a co-created activity and you can still be willing and happy to do that favor for somebody else. And then that long-term expectation kind of comes into play, like is a no contingent on a yes tomorrow Right? Or is every no freely accepted so that a yes can truly freely be given?
Speaker 1:Right, I like how you appraised that for sure. Really be given, right, I like how you appraised that for sure. All right, so when and so I wanted to speak with you specifically for your expertise with the you know asexual aromantic gray, all those spaces coming together Are there aspects that you see of community culture that are protective against CUS? And you just probably named them. You know the four levels of consent, the you know Betty Martin's work, the safe word, aftercare consent, those kinds of things. Is there anything specifically in that asexual space that you see that is protective?
Speaker 2:So some language that's come out of the asexual community that I absolutely love and I think applies on so many different levels and can be so helpful in so many different ways, is the language of favorable, indifferent, averse, repulsed. So we can look at attitudes about engaging in sexual activity in both cultural ways and personal ways. So cultural attitudes about engaging in sexual activity include being sex positive, you know, thinking sex is fine, not necessarily for me, but for whoever is consenting, and, you know, happy and willing. Sex neutral, not really placing any value judgment on sex. It just, it's a thing, it exists. And sex negative to have a negative attitude towards sex in general, to think it's bad or dirty or wrong and to also mandate sex within specific parameters, that's all within that sex negativity.
Speaker 2:But then we look at personal attitudes of engaging in sexual activity. Somebody may be sex favorable. They have a, you know they're favorable towards having sex. They want to engage in sexual activity, sex indifferent, they could take it or leave it. You want to have sex? Sure, we'll have sex. Sex averse no, I don't want to do that.
Speaker 2:You know, to be averse to engaging in sexual activity and then sex repulsed, to have a visceral response to the idea of engaging in sexual activity or even seeing sexual content in media or in conversations. Now we pathologize, averse and repulsed heavily. But if you think about it, you know, I don't know your sexual orientation. But if you are sexually oriented towards a single gender and you are presented with the opportunity to have sex with somebody who is of a gender you're not attracted to, or just in general, think about you know somebody you're not sexually attracted to and you're presented with the opportunity to have sex with them, maybe you're favorable. Maybe you're like, hey sure, let's give it a try with the opportunity to have sex with them. Maybe you're favorable. Maybe you're like, hey sure, let's give it a try. Maybe you're averse, you aren't into this person and the idea of having sex with them is not cool. Or you have a visceral response like, oh my God, I would never do that.
Speaker 1:This is fascinating. I've never thought about it that way. We are all averse, sexually, dependent on context. Yes, this is is fascinating. I've never thought about it that way.
Speaker 2:Thank you so much and yet that just is assumed. When you talk about an asexual person who may be averse or repulsed towards sex of any kind, there's this assumption that must be trauma related or there must be a reason. And there is no acceptance of this idea that well, if you're just not sexually attracted to the person, yeah, it's totally reasonable you might be averse or even repulsed to that idea.
Speaker 1:I love that. Thank you, that was like a whole new idea to me and I love it so much, thank you. Thank you so much. Okay, what about aspects of ace culture, gray culture, that it gets messy and it maybe promotes some damaging consenting to unwanted sex?
Speaker 2:So we have the term compulsory sexuality, which is the assumption that everybody wants and needs sex and is defined by some kind of sexual attraction and that, basically, in order to have a romantic relationship, you must be willing to engage in sexual activity. It's mandated through a lot of religious models and even political legal models. You know, if you think about wanting to get citizenship with a partner, you know if you're not having sex or romantically connected to them, you're not going to get a green card as their partner. Um, the idea of uh, what's what's the word? Um, consummating a marriage. We have all of these ways that we define relationships through sex.
Speaker 1:Like, the validity hinges on one behavior.
Speaker 2:And the validity of adulthood, to lose your virginity and become an adult, that to be an adult virgin is either to be waiting for somebody to end that state that it's this liminal state of existence, or that there is a failure of some kind along the way, either a failure of character or a failure of you know gender, that you are either unappealing to others or you don't meet some societal bar that qualifies you to be worthy of this thing called sex. So there is a lot of pressure, not specifically from the community, but that the community deals with feels, yeah, constantly as being part of society.
Speaker 2:The idea like I will never find a partner if I'm not willing to have sex, that is, is a heavy stigma. There's a lot of people that don't know they're asexual until they're in a relationship and they're spending this time figuring out why don't I like this thing that I was told I was going to really really like once I was finally in this relationship. Beyond that, I think within the community, the biggest challenges become prescriptivism. Yeah, you know, david Jay, who created the Avon forums in the early 2000s, did us all a huge favor and was very clear that everybody gets to define their own labels and he ran his forums with that idea that you know everybody is the final arbiter of their own labels. You get to decide what labels work for you. If you say you're asexual, then you get to use the word asexual, but that doesn't stop people from saying, oh, wait a minute, if you do this, you're not asexual.
Speaker 2:Or if you do this right and to really get down into that. Well, do you like this or do you do this thing? Or, you know, starting to really ask all of those qualifying questions that take away that agency, that take away that agency. That also becomes a challenge when asexual people are trying to validate their queerness within queer spaces and are invalidated that way, being told well, you know, if you have any sort of inclination towards a cross-gender attraction, whatever, that even means that you're not queer.
Speaker 1:Mm, hmm.
Speaker 2:Not recognizing that queerness is a spectrum. The idea of not conforming to heteronormativity in and of itself is queering the experience that's expecting things and some of it is within the community.
Speaker 1:We've got like gatekeeping of terms and trying to determine who's in, who's out. You know your letters so far down that you don't matter as much. That, yeah, I really appreciate that, but those are some of the aspects everyone's dealing with. That's um, that impacts our self-identity, claiming it for ourself, and can influence our choices of whether we think we should consent to unwanted sex or if we shouldn't. If I do, does that change who I am? This identity piece?
Speaker 2:Yeah, that it's a deal breaker. Yeah, that sex is automatically going to be a deal breaker. Do I disclose in a dating profile if I'm asexual or can I have that conversation in the getting to know you phase, which there are pros and cons to each. But, just as with anything, there's lots of different things that might be deal breakers in a relationship. We set sex as this top, most important thing, but that's not a priority for everybody, regardless of orientation, right? So just like you could be really into hiking and you want a partner who's also really into hiking, you may specifically seek that out. Or you may get together with somebody that you really like but they're not into hiking and you find another hiking buddy A lot harder to do sexually. But we are growing awareness around non-monogamous relationship models too. That may be more affirming for some people.
Speaker 1:Right. Okay, let's see Question four. As an expert in this field, what do you see as a solution for a woman experiencing negative outcomes of CUS and how would you work with a woman or a couple experiencing this? Maybe it's a light and light and like orientation discovery and they realize oh, I am asexual, we're in a mixed orientation marriage, we had no idea, you know, or finding this woman who's saying I really can't get to the favor, it's the chore, you know, it's always I can't get to making it a favor. When you're thinking about that, what do you see as solutions?
Speaker 2:To find non-sexual forms of intimacy and pleasure to center in the relationship. Instead, intimacy is closeness and connection and gets heavily conflated with the sexual. But there's emotional intimacy feeling seen and heard and having deep conversations. There's intellectual intimacy the sharing of knowledge and geeking out together or sharing your values with another person and having you know those kinds of you know person and having you know those kinds of you know intellectually stimulating conversations. There's sensual intimacy.
Speaker 2:Some asexual people still really want physical touch and cuddles and hand-holding and kisses.
Speaker 2:That doesn't have to move into a sexual space and again, space.
Speaker 2:And again, even those who are not asexual may not prioritize sex and may be just as happy to have that as a physical connection in the relationship.
Speaker 2:So you know, it is entirely possible for the higher desire or allosexual partner to get their sexual needs met through their own engagement, through solo sex, using toys, lubes, porn, erotica, giving themselves permission and being given permission to explore solo sex in a fully embodied, pleasurable way, rather than only seeing it as a less than throw away, get it over with type of thing.
Speaker 2:So giving even both partners that permission to explore individual, solo sexual pleasure because an asexual person with a high libido or who is interested in sexual activity may not be interested in sharing that because it's about directionality. So they may feel all those feelings in their own body and have an interest in engaging with that, but just not feel like sharing it and doing it with somebody else, and that gets stigmatized too. There is this expectation that if they have those feelings that they owe their partner to do that together. Reminding people, especially within desire discrepancy context, if you take two random people out of the population, the odds that they're going to have the exact same level of desire at the exact same time is almost impossible. Like desire discrepancy is inevitable in an interpersonal sexual relationship.
Speaker 1:You can count on it. It's not that it's disordered. That might happen. You can count on it.
Speaker 2:This will happen, yes, and yet it is always, or almost always, the lower desire partner who the other 23 hours and 30 minutes in their lives when they're not having sex.
Speaker 1:And I appreciate that, because it's so much intimacy is all somehow braided into one thing and you can see, oh, if the sex stopped, everything stopped, and you're like, no, let's unbraid all these forms of intimacy and make them each have a valuable space that we can prioritize and receive fulfillment from, instead of being like it all comes with sex or none of it comes at all. Yes, you know.
Speaker 2:Yes, you know what do they like to do together. Do they like to cook together, do they dance together, do they watch TV together? Do they go out to eat together and try new foods and swap each, you know, swap foods on their plates. And you know my spouse brings me fun new flavors of coffee mate when he sees them at the store, flavors of coffee mate when he sees them at the store. You know they had a mean girls flavor, it was like kind of a strawberries and cream flavor. But it's fun, you know there's, there's so many other things you were thought of.
Speaker 1:You were considering each other, prioritizing each other.
Speaker 2:You knew each other what would matter, you know yeah and hotter ship has her, has their book um, uh, the 18 love languages. Have you seen this one?
Speaker 1:no, but I'm glad because, oh, my gosh makes me mad yes, yes.
Speaker 2:So Anne's book is specifically in response to the you know Christian patriarchal, you know hetero model of Gary Chapman's book. So Anne's book focuses centers, platonic love, and they have 18 different languages instead of just five.
Speaker 1:I'm so glad you told me about this. I wasn't aware of this, oh it's a great book.
Speaker 2:You could buy it for $4 digital on Amazon and it's the fastest read you'll ever see. There's illustrations. It's a super quick, easy read. I don't remember the beginning because it's 18 languages, but look up Anne Hoddership, you know their name right. Yeah, yeah. But again, finding other ways to define love in the relationship, to seek pleasure in the relationship, to find intimacy between them, so that either sex can be taken off the table entirely in an interpersonal context and can be satisfied in a solo or non-monogamous context context and can be satisfied in a solo or non-monogamous context, or there can be some level of sex that actually is freely given and freely engaged in.
Speaker 2:That does center pleasure and hopefully for both partners. But there is that concept that some people enjoy giving and not receiving, some people enjoy giving and not receiving, some people enjoy receiving and not giving, and there is this expectation of mutual orgasm at the same time, rather than making space for the reciprocity isn't actually what everybody wants.
Speaker 1:You know, if you think I agree when, like when, I love like six principles of sexual health and whenever I get to the principle of mutual, people will think it's reciprocity in it. To me it's you each got what you wanted out, it was mutually like, it was mutually enjoyable. But we only get to enjoyment if we kind of got what we each wanted. And it's okay if we kind of got what we each wanted and it's okay if we wanted different things out of the experience. But both people were considered you know, what do you want out of this, what do I want out of this? And also reciprocity. I love that Right.
Speaker 2:And also just looking at the activity itself. Some people specifically get off on giving and don't really enjoy receiving. So if they're paired with somebody who gets off on receiving and not giving, that can actually work out really well. And with an asexual person, they could be on either space on that as well. So, and again, what are they getting out of? It can be that satisfaction that I was talking about earlier. I love getting a neck massage. We could just take turns. Or if I walk up and I give my partner a neck massage, I get satisfaction out of knowing that they're enjoying, that they're relaxing. It's a physical touch between us and even if I don't get a neck massage in return, it's not like that was a failure of that experience and I can't be expected to enjoy giving a back massage in the same way that the person receiving it is enjoying it.
Speaker 1:Right, that's a good analogy. That's a good one. Okay, let's see how. I think we all have opinions on the DSM and the diagnosis of hypoactive desire interest disorder. Looking through the lens of this research, as well as your lens and your expertise, should these outcomes be considered as meeting DSM criteria for this diagnosis? Is it something completely different? Tell me your thoughts and opinions.
Speaker 2:So the DSM-5 actually has an exclusion for people who identify as asexual on those diagnoses and that was pushed by AVEN, the Asexual Visibility and Education Network. I do question the validity of pathologizing low desire in general. The duality of hyposexual and hypersexual creates this assumption that there is a normal.
Speaker 1:You're right, because it creates the two extremes and so we're going to deduce that somewhere in the middle is normal. We're going to make a bell curve in our head, whether we've realized it or not. You're right, I'd never thought of that.
Speaker 2:So we're either comparing it to a non-existent normal in-between expectation or we are comparing it to the other random person that's been pulled out of the population and you cannot diagnose an individual as a pathology based on how they compare to this other random person. It's too subjective. Now the HSDD and FSID diagnoses do have some useful elements in them. They talk about clinically significant distress. Where is the distress coming from? Is it coming from societal pressure? Is it coming from a partner?
Speaker 1:And that's listed in the criteria. It says or distress of your partner. I mean it does.
Speaker 2:It actually does suggest that interpersonal distress is a good reason to make that diagnosis, which I think is a problem when it comes to internal distress. I think you know there is this did they have a lifelong lack of desire, which I think actually lends more towards recognizing it as an asexual experience? But if they had this experience of desire and libido that suddenly changed you know it's contextual what are the other things going on? That might be a reason to look into it as a pathology, but if we're just looking at their natural level of desire and libido, how do we decide that that is a problem when they may be perfectly fine with being at that level?
Speaker 1:except for the pressure, the distress can come from the comparison, not, yeah, their internal experience right, it's, the distress can be in that comparison, not their internal experience, right, it's, the distress can be in that comparison of.
Speaker 2:I'm not experiencing what my partner is or my friend is or what it looks like everybody else is, and yeah, I do think it's useful with the fact that they kind of changed it, at least for the female version of it. With interest and arousal, arousal can be something that needs consideration because of the concept of arousal non-concordance. Is there subjective arousal but no physical response? That's something we can work with. If there is that subjective arousal but they're not lubricating, they're not getting an erection, they're not getting any sort of arousal, physical experience within their body, even if they're completely turned on in their head, yeah Well, that's something we can address. Yeah, but if there's no subjective arousal and we're just telling them you should have subjective arousal, that's that's a lot of social interpretation on an individual experience. It's okay to not want sex, it's okay to not prioritize sex. We have to make space to let people know that's okay, regardless of orientation.
Speaker 1:Let's see we kind of answered this one as an expert in the field. What do you see as the solution of preventing women experiencing negative outcomes of this Right, because some people didn't have negative outcomes. Some people did have negative outcomes. I think we've talked about it a little bit, but I wanted to see if you had additional thoughts.
Speaker 2:I think it's mostly what I said, that you know really giving them the tools to understand consent, negotiation, safe words, aftercare, and to give them that ability to just not want it and to be okay with never wanting it and never wanting to engage in it. They may just not be, they may be averse or repulsed, and that's not going to change. And if they're favorable, it also doesn't mean that they're favorable for sex three times a week. You know, my favorite analogy is going to Disneyland. It's super fun, it's exhausting you. Some people want to go every single day and others are like you know. Give me a year or two.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, but they're still Disney favorable.
Speaker 2:Yeah, exactly. So some people may be favorable towards having sex, but it's a special occasion once in a while thing, and the pressure, the expectation to perform takes away all of the favorability and interest and just builds resentment and all of those negative feelings. So we have to find a way to take away the expectation.
Speaker 1:The expectation that's part of the solution is how do we manage this expectation we've got as a society? And it's permeating every community, I mean in the US. I'm making a huge statement. Someone can tell me if it's not, but I believe it probably is.
Speaker 2:And I want to support that higher desire partner in accepting a no, in accepting rejection, in giving that option for no. One of the best lines I heard recently was from Andrew Hartman, who said he was asking a favor of me that was not sexual, but said a no is as welcome as a yes and that was just beautiful to me. How can we give the higher desire partner language to give permission to say no, so that everything doesn't rely on either acquiescing or rejecting?
Speaker 1:Right. Right Because, with these expectations we all have, someone says do you want to have sex? There's only one right answer yes, right. So we have to address this so that or not tonight, or not tonight.
Speaker 2:Let's defer this expectation. We're not taking away the expectation, we're just putting it off and making it even more pressure the next time.
Speaker 1:I love this language. No is as welcome as a yes. Andrew Hartman, andrew Hartman, that's the new expectation, new goal. Okay, now tell me a little bit. You said that you had some thoughts that I didn't really write questions up for, so tell me a little bit. Just this op ed commentary If I sent you this 10 minute video, I'm like I want to know what your thoughts are. Here's what I found, but I want more eyes and opinions and thoughts on this.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think we wove a lot of it into the conversation.
Speaker 2:So I'm feeling pretty good about what we touched on and again, I am really grateful for that language because it's been hard for me to name that for people too that you know to recognize that you can consent without it necessarily being coerced or assaults, that there is this, there's this space here for for this idea and also, um, even if it is coerced or there's these negative outcomes, the fact that you're going to have people that honestly feel that they have consented and I can say that I my first marriage was seven years of that If I ever said no, he would stop.
Speaker 2:He never physically assaulted me, he never physically forced me into anything, but boy did he guilt, trip me into it and use societal expectations to make me feel like this is something I must do, that it is necessary within the relationship, all of these forms of coercion. But even within that, I never felt like, even though I got to the point where I was able to say it was coerced consent, the point where I was able to say it was coerced consent but it still, I still wouldn't have called it assault. Yeah, and I don't feel like he had any understanding of what. What was wrong with that situation?
Speaker 2:so I think that language of naming consenting to unwanted sex covers so much of that, because it acknowledges that the person feels that there is consent and names that it's still unwanted. I love that so much.
Speaker 1:It moves us from the binary to more of a spectrum that we can have more accurate conversations about people's actual experiences, instead of this binary of it was or it wasn't. And I like what you pointed out. That is one concern of mine in like teaching this or writing a book about this. Whatever this is going to become for me, I do have that concern that there are individuals who would conflate coercion with rape and and and, instead of seeing it as a spectrum, which that we do have some research coming out. That's really helpful. That's trying to give us that spectrum of here we know, forced, you know, we know these are the outcomes, but there's also verbal and emotional coercion and they have different outcomes. They're not, you know, and just being able to pull that apart and create, um, not such a binary but I that is something I'm concerned about the people will make a jump of. I can send it to unwanted sex. Does that mean it was assault? And here we're saying there's more options here than that.
Speaker 2:Well, I think that's what's also important about that, especially if you're able to use that language in a couple's therapy session, where you don't want to stigmatize, you don't want people to get defensive. But if you can name, you know, yes, it was consent and it was also unwanted activity, Like, if we can name that, in that setting there might be a lot more room for somebody to acknowledge oh well, maybe if it was actually unwanted then we shouldn't have done it, then we shouldn't have done it. But if you say it was coerced, well now I have to explain to you why it wasn't coercion.
Speaker 1:Or why I'm not a predator, why I'm not a criminal right, and that's not the discussion that I'm trying to have with people, but that is a defensive reaction. I've seen more partners open to the idea, but I have seen a couple men specifically get super defensive.
Speaker 2:I mean, I think you're going to have that in any situation, but hopefully that can at least be some of that useful language that useful language.
Speaker 1:I hope it is useful. I had one individual look over a book proposal. It was like a peer editor and they were like I'm so worried about the men who we're not alienating, the men and I don't know. I have feelings on. That Part of me thinks it might be okay to shine a light on something that's not helpful. And there's another part of me that's like and we want to do it in a way that people can receive it and we're not. We're not calling this criminal behavior. I mean there's this. You know more options.
Speaker 2:I think a lot of that again comes down to what are the alternatives, you know, if the man feels that, well, how else do I get this need met?
Speaker 1:This is a need for me.
Speaker 2:And how do I know, you know? How do I figure out where that consent line is?
Speaker 2:You know that's such a huge conversation in and of itself. Like you know, we think we can recognize body language, but that's not necessarily true. And we're in a society that tells you that playing coy is showing interest, right, you know. Oh, she's playing hard to get. She must want more of this. There's whole books written on that, the book, the Game. More of this. There's whole books written on that, the book, the game. So you know, pepe, le pew and penelope, we have cartoons about the chase, we have movies romanticizing the chase. So it gets really hard. We tell little little kids, oh, he hit you, it's just because he liked you, right, right, right. It permeates our society, this idea that you can't ever trust your instincts on another person's response, because it might prove exactly what, the opposite of what you think you're seeing.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:Yeah of what you think you're seeing, right, yeah, so again, giving them the language of negotiation and consent. And you know the wheel of consent and safe words and aftercare, and practicing a no, and practicing receiving rejection in a setting that isn't that immediately intimidating, rejection in a setting that isn't that immediately intimidating, you know, um, having that opportunity for embodied solo pleasure that can be explored alone and that might be the space for non-monogamy.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that might be the trickiest populations or those where those ideas are prohibited or less favorable even just solo sex and things like that. That's going to be a trickier sell for that population because there's a harder bind perceived there. This was awesome. I really appreciate your time and I did send a form so I have all your information. But just when this, when, when we publish this or when this gets used in another way, how can people who are just maybe awakening to the possibility of an late in life orientation discovery or wanting support as they choose their own orientation identity labels, how can they find you and all the things you're creating?
Speaker 2:ace sex educationcom or a sex education on instagram.
Speaker 1:um, yeah, that's, and you, you've got offerings for the public, but you've also got offerings for mental health professionals. If there's people who this is kind of language is very new to them, you're educating professionals too.
Speaker 2:I have a six hour six ASEC CE training on asexuality and aromanticism, hosted through Bianca Lariano's Ante Up program. I love it so so yeah. And then, yeah, I do do individual workshops from time to time too.
Speaker 1:Thank you so much you gave so much depth and breadth and life to this conversation. I really appreciated it.
Speaker 2:I appreciate your willingness to explore all these different ways of looking at these things and you know one of the things that I've seen when it comes to including asexuality in these books around desire or whatever there's often this inclination to do kind of a disclaimer somewhere in the beginning of the book and say if you're asexual, none of this matters.
Speaker 2:And it's so wrong because it is a spectrum Not everybody is going to identify on it right away. There may have misconceptions where you know they don't recognize that it's a label they have access to. And because of the spectrum of human sexuality there's so much overlap between the asexual community and people who do experience sexual attraction but don't want sex or have a lower interest in sex or any of that. So I think everything applies to the asexual community, especially when they may be favorable versus repulsed. So I know all of that. Plus, I think the language coming out of the asexual community is applicable across the board. So if you do include asexuality, I would love to see it woven throughout the entire book, rather than this, you know, token mention at the beginning of the book and say well, don't worry about it.
Speaker 1:Yeah, thank you for that advice. Yeah, that would be um. It might look inclusive, but feel dismissive, for sure.
Speaker 2:Yeah, more than anything. It's like just reminding people, and sexual attraction may not even be a factor. You know, when we assume sexual attraction is the primary mechanism of arousal, we forget all the other mechanisms of arousal. Person may find arousal through fantasy, or touch or toys or all of these other ways of accessing arousal that don't rely on sexual attraction kinks, fetishes. Thank you, all of it can still apply.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I appreciate that advice. That's fantastic. Thank you so much.
Speaker 2:Yeah, well, if you uh, if you need a sensitivity reader when you got things ready to go, please hit me up Really.
Speaker 1:Yeah, thank you. Okay, that that's fantastic. I probably will.
Speaker 2:Yeah, no, I love books like this. I have, you know, my whole shelf of all of the things. I am constantly trying to read all of these things. And was the book Desire that came out recently. I don't remember the two authors on it, but I will tell you they had a lot of great stuff in it, but they intentionally conflated desire and libido. They straight out said we're going to use these terms interchangeably, and that drove me nuts and I couldn't put my finger on it until I thought about it this way Think about an itch scratching an itch Libido is the itch, desire is the urge to scratch it.
Speaker 1:They usually happen simultaneously, but they're not the same thing. That's fantastic, thank you. That's really important to this discussion as well. Yeah, yeah, so all right. Thank you so much. I appreciate your time. We'll talk soon.
Speaker 2:All right, take care Bye.