The Tiny Voice of Reason

When Did I Realise I Was......What?

I get this question so often I thought it would be wiser to write down my answer instead of decking the next person to blithely voice it again.  I will endeavour to keep the sarcasm to a bare minimum since I usually reply with the question "When did you realise you were an arsehole?  How about brainless imbecile?"  Here in the realm of written English language I do believe I can straighten my shirt, dust off my sleeves and hold onto my temper.

I was told I was black when another child in primary school pointed it out as why I could not henna my hands.  I was told I was female when a boy tried to prevent me from playing soccer and pointed it out.  I was told I was a darker shade of brown and did not have the "nice" skin and/or hair when another family member received better clothing, toys and respect from other members of the family.  I was told I was a bastard by other children who pointed out my parent's marital situation.

I was told I was an immigrant with lesser rights when an African American at college requested I repay my EOP grant and speak to him when I got citizenship.  I was told I was a whore and slapped on the Number 4 train in NYC after picking up my baby from day care since I had no husband present.  I was told I was frigid and should see about a cure when I told a partner I preferred intimacy to sex.

I was told many things only after someone else used one part of me to categorise me and pointed out those parts.  I have been told many things by many people.  That I am unworthy, unloved, unwanted, abominable, a bastard, frigid, a whore, trash and many other things.  Will you ask me now when I realised I was all of these things simply because these words are what others use to describe me?  To realise in this definition of the word, is to accept the definition provided by another.  I realise nothing.  I know who I am.  There is nothing to realise.

You may see many separate things and others may see many more separate things as though I have been overly pixelated to distorted proportions.  To you I am a piece of something; to me,I am whole.  There was no realisation.  I did no realising.  I live and I am.  There was no "Eureka!" moment.  No "Hey, they are right and I am wrong" moment.  It implies a lack of self-awareness, knowledge and acceptance.  I already know there is no other me.  Even if I had a twin, there would be no other me.  Of course I am different.  Of course I am not like you.  I have no wish to be you, as I love being me.

Why not ask me; "When did you first fall in love?", or "When was your first crush?" or "When did you find your best friend?"  That would be more accurate in this concept of realisation you speak about.  I realised I had a crush on a boy at primary school when I was in 2nd form and he actually listened to what I had to say.  Or better yet, ask me when did I know who I was.  I was asked the silly questions "Who are you?" and "What's your name?" at the age of 2 and every few years before I attended school as if I would suddenly forget.  My name is Jo.  It is the only label I accept since I customised it to fit and I had to keep repeating it until others realised that is the only thing that's important.

I hope you know you can be a total #($#&!

Observations on Prejudice, Bigotry, Hatred, Violence & Equality

I'm familiar with prejudice.  Prejudice is a result of lack of information and/or experience.  People with prejudices usually do not realise they are prejudiced since it is all that they and the community around them know or have experienced the world around them. 

Like a housed person, someone who is not nor has ever been homeless, living under the assumption that all homeless people dropped out of high school, started drinking, using drugs and living on the streets.  That's prejudice.  More life experience, whether it is volunteering at a shelter and talking directly to the homeless or by becoming homeless at some point in life, is the only way to dispel prejudice against the homeless. 

Bigotry on the other hand is more of a sort of classism.  Being on a higher level or upper echelon of society than others who are not like oneself.  Whether by race, religion, gender, sex, sexual orientation, income, geographics and many other diversionary tactics.  Every prejudiced individual is not a bigot, yet every bigot is prejudiced.  One must believe oneself to be above the other religion, race or other labels and base this on the very few facts and/or experience one has in regards of the other religion, race or other labels. 

For example, a sexual bigot believes they are on a higher level than those who are not of their sexual orientation and bases this on the few facts and/or experiences they have with other sexual orientations and/or sexual minorities.  A straight individual believing they are better than gay, bi or asexuals due to assumptions of promiscuity of gays and bisexuals or sexual dysfunction of asexuals.  A gay individual believing they are better than straights, bisexuals or asexuals due to belief of rampant reproduction of straights and bisexuals or sexual dysfunction of asexuals. 

One can be a gender bigot where one gender is placed above another or where both genders are raised above those who are physically transitioning and affirming their gender.  There are gender bigots, racial bigots, religious bigots, nationality bigots, reproductive bigots, as the lists go on and on.  The use of a stereotype or one bare individualistic fact to raise oneself above others.

Hatred, in some cases, is the seeming change of certain personally held facts about another and the sudden realisation of similarities between individuals causing intense fear.  For example, two uber macho individuals who have the similar likes and dislikes yet different sexual orientations.  One holding personally held facts about gay individuals only to realise there are very few differences.  If there are so few differences, then how do you prove you are different?  How do you set yourself apart?  Some choose distance, some believe everyone is different, some become victims of random violence, others situational violence, while others choose intimate terrorism.

Situational violence is a mutual occurrence.  Cause and effect.  One person says something, another responds, and it escalates to where both become violent.  Random violence though, is just that, random.  One vulnerable stranger randomly selected for violence to prove something to oneself or society.  Intimate terrorism on the other hand is about control.  Control over every aspect of a person's life.  Reparation therapy is a form of intimate terrorism of a child from a parent, an individual from a family, or an individual from a community and/or church.

Intimate terrorism is about isolation and control.  There is no one to talk to.  No one to trust.  No one to share with.  No one to entrust all of yourself with.  No feeling of emotional safety.  No love.  No hope.  Only isolation, pain, distrust and fear.   No psychological escape until you begin to sink into the very depths of utter desolation and despair.  Where it feels as though you have even deserted yourself.  Even thoughts are bullying, derogatory and spiteful.  Where death feels as if it would be better than the non-life one is already living.  Yet, the cage is based on a prejudice.  Self-prejudice.  The constant distraction of benevolent jailers is meant to keep one from finding the cracks in the foundation and digging out from under the despair, fear and self-loathing.

One day, you begin to use the facts you have been given about yourself as questions.  When we begin to answer them in our own words instead of those we have been given do the locks on our prison finally begin to open.  A friend once asked me about prejudice, bigotry and slavery.  I responded with a story regarding my family.  My family won freedom from slavery generations ago, yet we still were the caretakers for generations of our former masters after slavery ended. 

When, as children, we were found in straight-forward equal conversation with one of our former master's generations our elders chastised us and reminded us of our place.  That we should not approach this person with disrespect.  Let me explain something.  In order to be anything, slave, social minority or equal, one must believe that is what you are.  It is all psychological.  As a child, I saw myself as an equal thus I conducted myself as an equal and no matter who told me I was not, that was their belief not mine. 

Physical chains are made of materials that disintegrate with time.  They erode in the wind, rain, sleet and snow with the seasons.  Mental chains can only be placed and removed by the individual who wears them.  As Pinocchio said "There ain't no strings on me."

Coming Out: There Are Other Types Of Closets

When I first met my ex-partner I thought he was a very nice guy.  I did not realised how far in the closet he was until after a month of dating he made excuse after excuse as to why I could not meet his family.  I would hear from his co-workers that his parents heard that he was dating someone but did not know who and wanted to meet the girl.

So I confronted my ex-partner with this information and he broke down.  I could never, ever meet his parents he said.  They would disown him if we were to meet.  They would never accept our relationship.  I remember thinking that this was the nineties.  Who the heck gets disowned anymore?  His parents eventually took matters into their own hands and used their keys one day to enter the house.

It does not leave a very good impression on the man who might possibly be your future pseudo father-in-law, since I was sure I was never getting married, to be wielding a Louisville Slugger and yelling "Who the fuck are you!?" when you first meet.  I smile instead of cringe at that memory because it amuses me even now.  He identified himself and carefully watched me lower the bat before calmly stating "You're black."  To which I replied quite confused "Yes...and?"  He simply shook his head and left.

I never hid from anyone that I dated outside of my race.  I am very open about it.  The opinion of my neighbours hardly mattered to me since they were complete strangers.  I have had my apartment in Brooklyn shot at for it.  I've been threatened with rape because of my daughter, who's father is actually black even though she looks Hispanic.  I've been called names, had bottles thrown at me and my apartment broken into.  Yet, I am who I am and I date whomever I please.   I live by no other dictate but my own and everyone else can get over it.

When my partner came home later that day, I said while toting laundry "I met your parents today."  He actually screamed like a six year old, dropped his pile of laundry on the floor and ran praying up the stairs.  After hiding me from them for a month his worse fears had come true.  They had found out.  Did I mention my partner was 30 to my 20 years?  He was so sure he would be disowned and from the yelling, pleading and begging I heard from his end of the conversation, it was almost a sure thing until his father put his foot down.  Yes, my partners mother wanted to disown her own son.

It's not a good thing to stand there and listen to your partner beg, plead and vow to leave you.  I started packing my bags.  If he wanted to please his parents that much then maybe he should stay single and closeted.  I was not the first person of colour he had dated and I knew I would not be the last.  I got partway to the door when his tearful conversation ended and he noticed me and my bags.  I was shocked that he actually had the nerve to ask me "Where are you going?"  I replied "Somewhere between "It was just a thing" and "It doesn't mean anything." I decided I'd rather be in my empty apartment than here with you."

What shocked me more was his next reply where he told me "But I told them you're pregnant"  Now that was news to me.  When did this happen and how was it medically possible?  I was on birth control as well as using condoms.  Well, I was pregnant I found out a few weeks later.  Life got pretty strange after that.  His sister had a christening party and he was all excited to go until she said he was welcome to come by as long as I stayed home.  That was the same for birthdays and other holidays. I thought this only happened in LGBT movies.

His mother tolerated our relationship you see.  It was his choice to stay with me so he could see his family on her terms.  I was to stay away so our relationship did not corrupt the children into thinking it was okay.  It got a little better when our son was born.  His mother quickly brought a priest over to bless the house and our son. 

I later found out what was really going on.  Our son was the first son of the first son so our son inherited his grandfather's name and the family fortunes.  My presence as his mother was tolerated until I decided I'd had enough.  I never found out how I got pregnant until the day, the mother who so quickly wanted to disowned him, dutifully paid $50k to try to end my parental rights.  My ex-partner purposefully got me pregnant in hopes of having a son so he could inherit.  His very words.

I endured negro comments, racist questions and astonishment over our son's skin colour where his sister asked "What happened? I thought black genes were dominant.  Why is the baby white?"   His immediate family were so concerned with his "dirty little secret" coming out that they didn't even invite me to my own son's christening party.  My partner kept saying to go with it, his family will eventually come around. It didn't matter most of the time since we never saw them.

The day I met the extended family was when my ex-partner's aunt showed up at their place of business unannounced.  She took one look at me, turned to her younger sister and said "The way you were carrying on you would think she was the shade of the black crayon."  Then she turned, grabbed my arm and held it up for her sister to see "She's brown."  Suddenly I was invited to Thanksgiving dinner but I was never, ever, comfortable around them.  They seemed to instantly forget what was said and done.  I never could. 

I eventually realised, after living with my ex-partner for a three more years where I mysteriously got pregnant every time I decided to leave.  Just like there is such a thing as dating a same-sex partner and being a homophobe, some can date an partner of another race and still be racist.  As far as their family is concerned, our children are not black.  To them, I do not exist.

My Asexuality; Simplified

There is a reason I say that sometimes I would rather have a friendship instead of a relationship.  At least a friendship is honest.  As friends we are not expecting anything other than a shoulder to cry on, an listening ear, comforting arms, a joke to break our sadness, and a stern talking to when we need it.  Just being a friend.  That kind of intimacy can be hard to come by when sex is involved.

When sex is involved some partners lose sight of the fact that we are people.  The gestures are no longer honest or done of spontaneity.  They are done with expectations.  In a friendship I do not have to question whether my friend wants something in return.  A hug is a hug, a kiss is a kiss and not always an invitation. 

In friendship, my friend does not pretend to listen to me as an opening to use sex for comfort.  My friend listens because they are my friend.  My friend knows I need the safety of our friendship to say how I feel, to express my emotions, to process whatever it is I am going through.  They do not use my confusion, my pain, my emotional state for their own gratification.

After the first few months I would already know most of my friend's life story.  Their family, childhood stories, favourite things, foods, places, hopes, dreams and aspirations.  I would not, after almost six years, barely know anything about my friend because they do not believe it is important for me to know.

A friend would not only remember but respect my boundaries because it would be important to our friendship and therefore my friend.  My friend would never try to manipulate me into disregarding my boundaries for their own single minded pleasure.  My friend would respect me more than that. 

Friendship, respect, communication and trust are the foundation of any relationship.  Whether platonic or romantic.  What I have searched for in my romantic relationships I have only found in my platonic ones.  Intimacy.  As an asexual I value non-sexual intimacy.  I value emotional and physical intimacy.  Sexual intimacy is only one part of physical intimacy.  For sexuals it can be 90% of physical intimacy, while for asexuals it can be anywhere from 50% to 0%.  It depends on the asexual.

It is very, very, very hard to be sexually intimate on a long term basis with anyone, regardless of whether you are sexual or asexual, when there is no intimacy.  Asexuals regard this as sex positivity and it is regarded as romance to sexuals.  It is simply intimacy.  That is all I have ever wanted.  It is what I cannot find.  I cannot remain a sex positive asexual, in a relationship with a sexual, without it.  When you are able to have both a friend and a partner, you have won the lottery.

Why is non-sexual intimacy so hard for others to understand?  Maybe this will help you understand:

Podcast: David Jay's Asexual Persepctive on Intimacy

Asexuality: Coming Out

Coming out for some is a one time thing.  For me, an asexual, I have to "come out" at the beginning of every single relationship.   Those who are Gay or Bi or Straight simply say those words with a preceding "I am" which provides anyone with the gender they are sexually attracted to and "Voila!" no problem.  

All of my relationships seem to start the same.  I explain that I am not sexually attracted, not interested in sex yet I do like talking to them, spending time and they pretend to listen, while interpreting what I've said to mean I simply need time to get to know them before the passion explodes.  Saying "I am Asexual" only starts the crickets chirping and then explaining that no I do not self-replicate.

I never had a word that someone could look up that explains my sexual orientation until 2006.  It was left up to me to try to pull the millions of little pieces which create the entire picture to explain it to others.  There were so many conversation detours when I tried to explain it all that in the end I just mentally said "Oh, to hell with this! Believe what you will!" in sheer frustration.

I tried to explain that my lack of sexual interest has nothing to do with the orgasm experience and it never got any further than that.  There were so many questions on how could I not want an orgasm.  What sexual dysfunction did I suffer from?  Did I get therapy for my sexual dysfunction?  Did I stop my medication and was I at least considering surgery to fix whatever had to be wrong with me?  Am I a lesbian?  Am I bisexual?  Did I secretly hate men? 

Explaining that I have experienced orgasm by myself, yet, see no reason to repeat the experience is met with slack jawed shock.  How can you not like masturbation?  Everyone loves masturbation!!  Well excuse me for having a "Meh" experience with myself.  I never said I hated masturbation, it just does not "blow my mind" the way it does yours.  I have other things I would much rather be doing.  The first couple orgasms are okay and then I find myself becoming rather bored with the whole thing. 

The conversation took so many twists and turns off subject since many can understand that you want to have sex and orgasm with someone of the opposite sex, or the same sex and the idea of not wanting either short circuited their synapses.  I had to want someone else.  If I wanted to sleep with someone else, fine, it was my fault not theirs.  I would be bi or gay and it was just something they could not give me sexually.  Being Asexual, on the other hand, sounded like I was sneering at their sexual technique. 

How could I not enjoy it?  Why would I not think of "moving on" to someone else who may be sexually compatible if they were not?  I had to move on to someone more sexually compatible.  I had to.  They did not want to be known as the one who made a girl go entirely celibate.  The idea of being so bad you "turn someone gay" no longer applies in this day and age.  Everyone finally understands that there are different sexual orientations and you were simply not sexually compatible to begin with.  The problem is that no one understands that Asexuality is a sexual orientation and still see it as a "medical problem that can be cured".

Eventually we would end up at the subject of my children, as their "Aha!  I gotcha!" topic.  If I were "Asexual" and had no sexual attraction to anyone of either gender why did I have children?  You have to have sex to have children?  If you have no desire to have sex that means you have no desire to have children! 

Well that answer was simple.  I possess a reproductive urge which is separate from my sexual orientation.  Just like many ask gay men and women why they have biological children when they are gay, or why a reproductively healthy heterosexual woman will opt to adopt or use IVF.  I wanted a child.  I had a child.  Internal fertilisation is only one way to reproduce and I direct them back to their biology classes on the subjects of internal and external fertilisation in nature.

I always saw myself being a parent.  I may never have given a thought, when I was a teen, as to what I would have to do to have one yet I knew I would have children.  I will confess to seriously considering being a foster or adoptive parent directly after giving birth.  These were all the many detour subjects that I went, and go through, with my never ending coming out. 

Sometimes having to revisit previous conversations for more clarification due to a significant lack of knowledge.  When we finally got to the different types of asexuals; homo-romantic, hetero-romantic, bi-romantic, pan-romantic, aromantic etc., that sets off new rounds of questions and amazingly actually has more than a few people understanding their own sexuality better.

Asexuality: Romantic Asexuals and Sex Positivity

Many people wonder how a person can be asexual and have sex with their sexual partner.  There are people who do things for their partner that many sexuals and asexuals cannot understand who will say, when asked, "I love them.  I do it because I love them".  It is much more than that.

We do not despise or hate the concept we observe or participate in with our partner.  We simply do not understand the concept.  Like one partner buying tickets to, and attending, a baseball game then enthusiastically rooting for their partner's team to share in the elation and happiness.  The emotions.  We know that just us being there, even though we don't understand a thing that is going on, amplifies whatever they are feeling.

Before, there may have been trepidation at hugging, squeezing and crying on a stranger's shirt when their team hits a home run and with us in attendance they can let down some of those walls we unconsciously keep up to protect ourselves emotionally.  They can share the moment with someone they trust, us, and it makes it better.

Emotional intimacy is not universal to all relationships.  There are those of us who do not experience any romantic feelings towards anyone.  There are aromantic sexuals and asexuals, where a fuck-buddy or platonic friendship respectively, are enough.  The difference between us, romantics and aromantics, is how we are connected to our partner.

Sexual romantics connect emotionally and physically while asexual romantics connect only emotionally.  It is not really a need to "talk" and share "emotional secrets" like many believe.  It is more like having a center of calm in our life where we can go and cuddle next to when all our emotions are in chaos.  Someone to keep us grounded and when we eventually need to talk, someone who will calmly listen while all that chaos pours out until we feel calm and at peace again. 

This is what many aromantics, and maybe even some romantics, do not understand.  There is nothing to "fix".  We are not looking to create an uncomfortable emotional anxiety, where our partner is expected to slay invisible dragons.  It is all about the calm.  Our port in the storm.  Someone who exudes such calm it helps us remember how to re-ground ourselves.  Emotional chaos being met with more emotional chaos causes emotional explosions.

When my partners are calm just a hug makes me feel energized.  Most people who meditate will tell you the same thing.  Yet, it is very hard to explain to the person you are hugging, why you need to hug them so much.  It is during these times that my partner may become irritated and the energy changes, for lack of a better concept.  His energy goes from calm to disturbed so I stay away.  The best way I can describe it is being so emotionally connected to someone you pick up their emotions and body language even when they are saying something entirely different to you.

Sometimes we can feel the anger rolling off in waves and they will say "I'm fine." yet, we know differently and give them space.  Other times we can feel the hurt rolling off in waves yet they say they're angry, will scream obscenities and/or do things to emotionally hurt us to keep us away.  That is why a lot of romantics unknowingly stay in emotionally abusive relationships.  I have been in enough to know why I have.  The mixed messages.  All those mixed messages we receive until our partner's emotions, the ones they refuse to deal with, are so chaotic it hurts to be around them.

I cannot speak for other romantics, sexual or asexual, I experience an emotional flare during physical intimacy.  As I said before, that calm/love my partner exudes is a pleasant sensation and it is multiplied tenfold when they are looking at me with intent.  All that emotion is focused and you can literally feel it.  I know someone knows what I'm talking about.  A sexual romantic will exclaim that the focused emotions take physical intimacy to an entirely different level.  For a romantic asexual it takes our emotional intimacy to an entirely new level.

It is all about the emotion behind the intent.  If the emotion is positive, even though I do not feel anything on a physical level I definitely feel it on an emotional level.  If the emotion is negative, whether I am the trigger or not, that brings all walls up and I won't be emotionally there during any type of physical intimacy.

Whether you are sexual or asexual, if someone with negative intent is approaching us in a sexual way, there is never any pleasure in the act.  Regardless of how our body responds to the external stimuli there is no pleasure only a feeling of violation, or a breach of trust, simply because we were touched by negative intent.  When a romantic, sexual or asexual, is in a relationship with someone who is always negative and in emotional chaos there will be no sex positivity.  They will be too exhausted from shielding against the emotional onslaught.

When we do finally leave, we tend to say that "Love was not enough."  well love had naught to do with it.  When we love it is an emotion we feel separately from our partner.  We share how we feel through emotional, physical and sexual intimacy depending upon how we connect to our partner.  We have no control over how our partner connects to us, how they process and express their emotions.  We stayed because we created an illusion that we could control their emotional weather.  We leave because we realise that they have to learn to predict their own and prepare themselves accordingly.

Love never goes away so long as there are fond memories present.  We will always love the past person, regardless of who they become because the love belongs to us.  We simply share it with them if they decide, and they must decide, to accept it.  It is always ours and we never have to stay to keep it.

Co-Existence: Asexuality and the Reproductive Urge

Many people do not understand Asexuality.  Most who hear asexual immediately think celibate.  Some ask if we are nuns or priests or amoebas, and if not why deny ourselves?  It is assumed that either we never achieve arousal, we are suppressing it or we have some physical problem that's preventing arousal.  Well.  I am here to clue you in.  My arousal receptors work just fine and nothing is being suppressed. That is a physical function that is being described.

There are two parts to sexuality, the way I see it.  There is arousal then there are thoughts and intent.  The thoughts and intent are what I see as necessary for sexual orientation, or what gender one is fascinated by and wants to engage in sexual activity with during arousal.  For heterosexuals that would be the opposite sex or gender, for homosexuals that would be the same sex or gender, for bisexuals it would be both sexes and/or genders and for pansexuals that would be all gender identities, gender expressions and sexes (transsexual, intersex, gender queer, masculine and feminine). 

When it comes to asexuals most do not focus on gender, sex, gender identity or gender expression during arousal.  Those that do focus on a specific gender to form an alternative intimate relationship with, consider themselves hetero-romantic, homo-romantic or bi-romantic.  Arousal happens and we will either seek manual relief to get on with life or let it go away on it's own.  This could be your usual stuff from clothing or the every day morning wood men have no control over.  To engage in sex with another person, during arousal, never crosses our minds.  In the sphere of sexuality we do have a sexual preference for gender and that is; none.

Like everyone else within the other sexual orientations, asexuals are varied when it comes to the reproductive urge.  Some of us want to have children.  Sex positive asexuals have the option of the usual route where sperm fertilises egg to produce zygote during internal fertilisation.  Others who are not sex positive may opt for in-vitro or external fertilisation, surrogacy, or adoption.  Not any different from other members of society.  While some asexuals are not sex positive and would prefer never to have sex, there are many women from other sexual orientations who are not reproductive positive, and would prefer never to give birth.  The same goes for men as some would rather not experience parenthood.

 Asexuality is very far from celibacy.  Celibacy is the voluntary denial or suppression of existing sexual desire of the same, opposite or both genders during arousal.   Asexuality is more like being wanting a best friend type of intimate connection and never having a desire to be a sexual partner or lover.  Depending upon personality type we can be cuddlers, snugglers, huggers, kissers and sensualists.  We've all had best friends who we never see in a sexual light that we have platonic yet satisfying intimate relationships with. 

That is how asexuals view relationships, yet, with the number of asexuals who don't realise they are asexual and the number of openly sexual people it is quite hard to find a partner who is not sexual.  I still remember repeating that phrase that well meaning people would say to me "You just have not found the right person yet." even though looking at both genders never elicited any fantasies of dragging some miscellaneous body type off to bed.  

To our endless consternation, even the sexual virgins of other orientations in elementary and high school continuously vocalised about their fantasies of sex even though they had never had sex.  Sex with classmates, the mall attendant, or the neighbour next door and they did so with religious zeal until you wanted to scream "Holy Hell!  Just shut up about it already!"  Yet, we knew that would probably get us ostracized.  Walkmans were a brilliant invention back then. 

Asexual is worse that being gay or bisexual for some folks, and you get the same flack as if you were bisexual.  Instead of having one gender trying to change your orientation, you have both.  Instead of being considered a fence sitter, you're considered to be in "Total. Freaking. Denial." or some "Closeted religious nut. Who are you saving yourself for?  Jesus?"  Yes, those are quotes.  Even gay men and women realise that they will never find anyone of the opposite sex sexually satisfying, if ever, sexually attractive.  Eventually we accept that society is wrong and the anxiety of being required to check off that box goes away.

Sex positive asexuals are able to engage in relationships with sexuals while other asexuals are more likely to form intimate friendships.  Those of us who are sex positive view sex as a series of activities we engage in to pleasure our partners, not ourselves.  It is a compromise we make just as some sexual men and women of other orientations will engage in sexual acts which do nothing for them; such as oral, anal, and other sexual acts or positions for their partner's enjoyment.  Knowing their partner is enjoying and experiencing pleasure is the pleasurable return for them.  What usually goes wrong in all types of relationships, whether sexual with asexual or sexual with sexual are misinterpretation of sexual cues.

Since asexuals are not aroused by either sex, we do not connect arousal with a separate sexual partner yet our sexual partners do.  Like some sexuals who get annoyed when one partner is in the mood for sex and the other sexual partner is not, this happens more often in asexual with a sexual partner relationships.  While sexual partners may go a few days without sex, asexuals can go permanently without sex and we often lose track of the last time our partner was sexually active.  Communication is essential in all types of relationship and doubly so in asexuals with a sexual partner relationships. 

What most sexual partners who enter relationships with a sex positive asexual partner often do not understand right away is that simply engaging in sexual acts does not change an individual's sexual orientation.  An asexual will never connect arousal to another individual.  A sex positive gay man, where the thought of sex with a woman does absolutely nothing to, or for him, neither disgusts or connects his arousal to the opposite sex.  Whatever sheer number of women he sleeps with to fit the social norm it will never change his sexual orientation. 

A gay person can be sexually aroused by the same-sex and may lose that arousal the minute someone from the opposite-sex steps in and vise versa for straights.  The same goes for asexuals.  We can be aroused and lose that arousal the minute another person shows up.  No matter how many times we engage in sexual activity with our sexual partner we will never exact any satisfaction, fulfillment or emotional connection from the act, though we may have a more emotional connection during the cuddling time after.  It can be a very hard thing, no pun intended, for a sexual partner to accept when in a relationship with an asexual.  An asexual will never enjoy sex with another person and it is quite annoying when a sexual partner wants to spend 45 minutes or more trying to force an orgasm from you with the reasoning that you are really straight or gay since you are in a relationship with them.

It is absolutely ironic that both bisexuals and asexuals can form intimate relationships with either sex or gender and both can be accused of cheating due to the very natures of their separate orientations.  Some sexual partners reason that since an asexual partner does not reach sexual fulfillment by their hand, since the asexual is in a relationship with them and they are a certain gender or sex then their asexual partner may be able to find sexual fulfillment with another person of either gender or sex, not realising that asexuals are sexually attracted to neither.  

Asexuals go through a discovery phase where we believe we may be gay because we don't want to have sex, then think maybe we're bi if we don't want to have sex with the gender we are with, only to realise that we feel the same sexually towards both; nothing.  Society automatically believes that everyone is sexually oriented, if not to anyone then someone.  Society automatically believes that every human enjoys penetrative sex.  That all gay men love, enjoy and particpate in anal sex and that all women of any sexual orientation enjoys vaginal sex. 

They do not agree that both sexes or genders enjoy being touched with all the commercials of women slapping men for groping and men being paranoid and/or homophobic around gay men.  Some asexual men, do not realise they are homo-romantic instead of gay until being immersed in what they see as the "gay lifestyle" where everything is "sex, sex, sex! Argh!"  They are looking for an intimate platonic relationship within sexual realms. 

Some asexuals watch porn, others like erotica, some are part of the BDSM society as traditional sex acts with a person are not always necessary within BDSM intimate relationships, others masturbate, some don't, some kiss, others don't, it's all about individuality.  Personally, for me, I went through my tween puberty years aesthetically attracted to pretty people, men and women, and with no desire to form any intimate relationship with them.  My teen years were spent sexually oblivious to the opposite sex and the formation of two intimate platonic relationships. 

When I accepted the proposal to move from best friend to partner I did so for selfish reasons in order to forestall any more attempts to ask me out.  I was, and still am, never aware when someone was flirting with me and it was becoming very old the way they would get bent out of shape because I did not have a clue and begin with the verbal abuse.  No one questioned anyone with a partner.  They assumed the partner was the reason I was joyfully oblivious.  I guess I went the closeted route complete with asexual beard.

When my mum moved us 3000 miles away, I stayed with the established partner idea and used it as a buffer for the 5.5 years I did not see my partner physically.  To many, 5.5 years without sex sounds horrific and terrible yet I absolutely enjoyed being free of any romantic entanglements.  I was able to express my androgyny without the restrictions of a traditional relationship where I would be made to observe the gender roles.  My mum knew that I was 3000 miles away from my partner, who as a free sexual man was cutting quite the swath through the local women, yet I was content not to date. 

The boys in our apartment building and neighbourhood did not know what to make of me.  They kept asking and I kept turning them down.  One stood on the stairwell and said mouthed what looked like "I love you." to which I replied "No you don't.  Don't bullshit me.  I don't love you.  You don't love me.  You just want to fu*k.  Let's be honest."  Another asked me out every day he saw me without fail, until one day I had to use my steel toed boot to reposition his balls after he put his hands on me.  Personal space, man.  Personal.  Space.

Mum immediately concluded that I must be gay and I spent the last year or so very, very, very annoyed with her attempts to feminize me to the point of encouraging sex.  I believe I was the only college freshman who arrived on campus with a super-sized economy box of condoms my mum had bought me.  Everyone else was having an abundance of sex around me so I did my part in ensuring they were safe and sold every single one of them individually for a buck.  Grocery money!  Yea!

My sexuality even confused me up until I was 30 and my current partner asked if I was bisexual because he noticed I don't like sex, cuddling, snuggling, kissing, or holding hands yet I do like a good hug.  Maybe I'm just not good at PDA?  I'm more like a roommate or best friend he says, that he has sex with occasionally.  The only way to describe it would be that disturbing sensation you get when you take your index finger, place it directly in front of your face and slowly bring it forward to touch right between your eyes near the bridge of your nose.  Ugh.  That is how it feels when anyone sits too close to me.  When they enter my personal space uninvited.

I don't fantasize about anyone.  I don't have any sexual fantasies.  I do however get aroused reading erotica about imaginary people.  They don't exist, I can't imagine faces, or bodies, so they are more like shadowy figures.  I don't feel any pressure to have sex with them, they sleep with each other and leave me out of it and I can skip over any sex scenes to continue with the story.  It's more like being able to feel the emotion through the words.  I don't understand what they're talking about with the sex scenes but I can understand the emotion.  I form emotional connections not physical ones, so that, I can relate to.  I guess I have emotional non physical fulfillment and satisfaction through erotica.  Geez, that is hilarious even though I'm dead serious.  Once the book is done, I can recall the emotional parts but never the sex scenes.

I mainly like the romantic ones where they break up, make up, almost lose each other, realise that sex isn't everything and is not what you build a relationship on.  Maybe I feel empowered that the sexuals in the book actually get it and then there are those erotica books with, I can't call them Asexual partners because they are still sexual, yet the don't have anal/vaginal sex.  I love those books.  I think I bought an entire series once because there was no anal/vaginal sex.  That's hard to find in erotica.

I spent half a year moderating a Gay Men forum until I finally came across the term asexual on the View of all places and that is how I found AVEN, The Asexuality Visibility and Education Network.  Other folks just like me in relationships like mine, or not, sharing stories.  It was as if I finally let out the breath I've been holding for years.  I like reading about other folks having sexual relationships but don't necessarily want one for myself.  Once upon a time I would wonder "what's wrong with me?" I must be straight because I like to look at men, yet I don't want to do any of this stuff with them. 

I was always disappointed after sex.  Not that it did anything for me but that I would always hit auto mode while doing it.  Like it was a practiced habit instead of anything spontaneous that sexual partners expect.  My technique is fine as I've had years of reading to perfect it yet, technique and passion are two different things.  I don't have a passion or a desire for sex and it shows. Everything I know about sexual technique I learned from erotica. 

Just the way someone who needs to learn a skill they have no interest in because it is necessary.  We've all learned how to use a computer program and consult a manual when you a sequence is not giving you the results you anticipated. I guess I had this idea that keeping them sexually exhausted with a variety of techniques would kill, or forestall, the participation questions of "Did you come?"  Who would complain about being sexually exhausted and satisfied just because there was a lack of one sexual act?

Yet, it's kind of how many men I've spoken to describe a sexual partner who does not like oral sex but will submit to it to please their partner yet the knowledge that they are submitting instead of participating takes all the joy out of the act?  They will then ask their partner, "If you don't like it, why do it?"  Where their partner will reply "You like it."  That is true of sex positive asexuals.  Sex is a way to take care of our partner's needs.  They are sexual after all and sexuals need sex.  They do all that romantic stuff they aren't all that comfortable or happy with for us and it is a compromise within a relationship.  There is sexual compromise in every relationship.

Sexual partners, even though they say they it does not bother them that you will never be able to share a connection on a sexual level with them, still carry hope that it could happen.  Which may be why partners get orgasm tunnel vision for 45 minutes trying to prove something to themselves that's not necessary with me.  That is what I find disappointing.  The dismissal of who I am.  The continued hope that they can change my orientation.  Hell, the dismissal of my orientation in favour of me being medically ill.  They think I'm fine upstairs, mentally, since I'm with a partner yet I must have a medical problem that should be checked out and cured so I'll be perfect.  For them.

The comparison would be like a woman finding the man she's always wanted but he is gay, so she believes he should find a cure so she can have her Prince Charming.  Get to it man! Chop, chop!  Why can't people just enjoy the relationships they can have?  Then you ask yourself, do I fear losing this connection so much that I would be willing to be someone else for the duration of the relationship just to keep it?  Eventually, if not spontaneously, the answer will be no.  We won't love the person any less but to demand we compromise ourselves is not the way to foster happiness.

Being in a relationship for all the wrong reasons.  I, to have the companionship I crave and they for the initial novelty at having a partner who never gets sexually jealous since I don't get what the big deal is about another pair of genitals.  That song from Weeds is stuck in my head because to me genitals are all made out of ticky tacky and they all look just the same.  Really, though what is so enticing about them?  It's like asking me to get sexually excited over a lung.  I'm not bashing other asexuals who do find them aesthetically appealing, I'm simply stating a fact.

I'm not a militant Asexual who thinks all sexuals should be neutered and the excessive sexuality of society should be stopped and/or censored.  Don't be so surprised, I have said there are extremists in everything.  What?  You thought all those folks after censorship were all religious whackjobs?  That's just naive.  There are even members of society, including the LGBT community, who would like to curtail those they consider "breeders", which I translate to be people of all orientations who have a reproductive urge.  With every thought; there's an extremist attached.

The Non-Equality Equality Movements

There have been several civil rights movements in the United States starting with the simultaneous Black and Women's Suffrage movements for the rights of blacks and women to enter the voting sphere currently occupied only by white men.  The Black Suffrage movement included some men of colour.   From Hispanic, Asian, Middle Eastern and African descent, with the exclusion of Native American men, fell under the Black label due to the varied dark colours of skin pigmentation. 

In the end, the black men in the Black Suffrage movement while agreeing that every man should be equal believed it did not apply to women of any race.  Women of colour suddenly were left in limbo, not accepted within the Black Suffrage movement due to their gender and excluded from the Women's Suffrage movement due to their skin pigmentation. 

Men of all colours believed in the current gender roles of the societal binary system which held that the man was the head of the woman and above her in all financial, familial and religious decisions leaving little need, they concurred, for Women's Suffrage as women already had freedom from decision making.  The equality idea suddenly had restrictions of privilege.  What were considered rights at the beginning of the equality battle were now viewed as special privileges that women wanted.  What drew the men together, their eventual common ground, was the belief in the traditional man.

This theme carried out within the Women's Suffrage movement with traditional women who supported the traditional gender roles began campaigning against the Suffragists.  They were called The Antis or the Anti-Suffragists.  The term feminist was used to describe the militant woman who was aggressive in the fight to free women from the restrictions of the gender roles, never gave up regardless of arrest or persecution like one would believe the "fairer sex" the "weaker sex" were incapable of.  A militant woman in the fight for Women's Equality.  A Feminist.  A woman with a "man's" attitude stepping into the masculine gender role.  What many considered an "abomination".

There was no equality all around within the Women's Suffrage movement just as there is no equality all around within the LGBT movement as there will always be overly militant factions who prefer equality only for those who resemble them whether by race, class, religion, education, marital status, gender identity, gender expression and/or sexual orientation.   Just as some gay people of colour are today excluded by, or in turn exclude, gays of another race, or trans sexual/gender and gender queer are excluded by, or exclude, those of matching sex and gender, so did the women from the late 1800s to 1900s. 

It took women 72 years to get the right to vote but not full equality and while men of colour had won their right to vote 72 years earlier by breaking with the Women's Suffragists, they found that was all they won.  The second civil rights movement began the fight to end the separate but equal stipulation to both Suffrage movements. Both people of colour and women faced bias through racism, classism and sexism with separate grade schools, colleges, and employment opportunities. 

Elementary education was now compulsory since the abolishment of child labour in the 1930s where the children of the poorer classes were finally seen as more than products of their class and undeserving of the right to rise above their station.  Colleges on the other hand were still reserved for the upper and middle classes.  There were separate colleges for women and men and again for men and women of colour.  Such as Howard University, Elmira Female College of NY, Barber-Scotia College, Morehouse College and Wesleyan College, to name a few.  There was no true equality only levels of privilege.

At the same time women won the right to vote in 1920, a Eugenics policy of sterilizing certain mental patients, the poor classes of society and criminals was enacted under the guise of 'improving the human gene pool" but was initially focused on social class and intelligence.  Racial segregation, marriage restrictions, segregation of the mentally ill, and compulsory sterilisation were all part of the Eugenics movement. 

Nearly every state had eugenics laws on their books with California leading the way in compulsory sterilisations, which finally ended everywhere during the second Civil Rights era.  Psychiatrists used the captive gay patients, the mentally ill, and the criminals, from prisons and mental institutions as guinea pigs for shock therapy, compulsory sterilisation, and libido-suppressing medication among others.   As I said, there was no true equality for anyone just levels of privileges.  The highest privileges going to those who were traditional men and women. 

During second civil rights movement there were two groups fighting for equality.  The Black civil rights movement fighting for equality of people of colour and the Gay Liberation movement.  The first commercials against the "homosexual disease" were aired during the 1950s (Boys Beware 1950s PSA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqIIeGmhL2Q&feature=player_embedded) and the first steps to employment discrimination for gays were created when Republican President Eisenhower signed an executive order barring gays and lesbians from federal employment.  Marriage restrictions were already present due to the sodomy laws which not only made anal but also oral sex illegal.   Many today still assume that all gay men exclusively perform anal sex and the sodomy laws should be reintroduced to prevent same-sex marriage.

Many of the LGBT community were also present in the Black civil rights movement and I dismiss any clamour to say different.  You can be any race and gay, you can be any gender and gay, you can be any class and gay, and you can be any sex; gender normative or trans and gay.  Baynard Rusting, the black gay man behind the organization of the march on Wasington DC with Dr. King Jr. was right there fighting for equality for all. 

Again, there were tossed only privileges given to those who are traditional instead of full equality for all.  Men of any race are paid higher than women of any sexual orientation.  Men and women cannot be fired due to race, religion, gender granting job security.   Gay, lesbian, asexual, bisexual, trans men and trans women have no employment security due to sexual orientation yet those who are considered traditional as in heterosexual and gender normative are protected.

We might say that all this should have been covered under the civil rights, gay liberation and women's rights movements but what really happened instead was not a granting for full rights but a protection of the privilege of those who are physically, psychologically and sexually traditional.  First by the inclusion of traditional black men, then by the inclusion of traditional women and I am now watching the inclusion of traditional gays, lesbians and gender normative post-operative transsexuals only. 

When the Republicans are the only ones starting to be inclusive to this new civil rights movement, it usually means another compromise on equality is on the way.  After all, "radical" congressional Republicans backed Black Suffrage and they were also the first major political party to back Women's rights, even when they didn't fully agree on a personal level.  The new civil rights movement is already splintering again with the decisions to wait until later for some groups of non-traditional men and women to achieve equality with the delay of passage of ENDA and repeal of DADT.  The last few civil rights movements were more of a "let's toss them a few things that seem like full equality so they will vote for us" deal.

Why else would we be here again, still fighting the traditionalist men and women for the dignity to be ourselves?  Fighting to retain reproductive control, sexual freedom, marriage equality, employment security which were battles that began in the US almost 200 years ago in the 1800s.  Every attempt that is made is met with the fretful squeal of "traditionalists" against full inclusion of, what is now their privileges, so everyone can gain full equality; "Another attempt to destroy the traditional family!"

Let's not be deflected again.  Support the American Equality Bill for full inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity to the Civil Rights Act (I hope gender expression is included):  http://www.change.org/petitions/view/petition_for_full_equality_for_all_americans

Freaking Out About Non-Binary Individuals & Couples

When a society dies and another rises from it's ashes it is only reborn and hopefully a bit wiser than the last incarnation.  Our society was born from dissent of the class, religious, racial and financial restrictions of the past society.  A bit simplistic yet close to the truth.  Though the social restrictions were tweaked, changed or abolished entirely we still adopted the social binary system from the previous few social incarnations.

There is always a continuous fight over adoption of laws that seek to restrict class, wealth, race and religion.  We have only had one previous battle over our social binary system, before the current battle for non-binary couples, and that was for one group of non-binary individuals; independent women.  Women who no longer wanted to be forced into the pretense that they were the "weaker", "inferior" and/or "submissive" sex.

I would say that it was only after Hitler's great adaptation of United States Eugenics theory and the ultimate horror of innocents being tortured, starved, experimented on, gassed and burned that the world took notice.  Even them I am not sure if the fight was to save the people or protect the wealth of nations threatened.  Before Hitler, and long after his death, the United States Eugenics program continued well into the 1970s. 

Ironic that is when the LGBT community also started fighting back from being involuntarily committed, treated to shock therapy, sterilisation, experimental medication and the like as punishment for their "perversion" of the binary.  "Deviant behaviour" they called it, where men and women adopted the "sexual and social behaviour" of their binary opposites.  A deviation from the binary system.  Against the "social nature" of the binary.  A dire grievance against society they claim.

Eugenics was seen as a way to cure the Human Race, although the Neo-Nazis and the KKK eliminate the human part to that as they believe the White race IS the ONLY race, of impurity, inferior stock and create a stronger human.  As the binary is seen as our societal model then those who are non-binary are seen as the inferior stock to be eliminated. 

The physically feminine men, the physically masculine women, the sexually feminine men, the sexually masculine women, the feminine sounding men, the masculine sounding women, any trans sexual or gender queer, those with no sexual drive, and dependent upon which societal group we are in the lesser qualities each group qualifies as non-binary. 

The stay-at-home father, the working mother, single parents, because they believe the binary must always be present in all of society for society to continue existing.  There must be a man and a woman.  There must be a physically, sexually masculine man who sounds like a man with the high sex drive of a man paired with a physically, sexually feminine woman who sounds like a woman with the lower sex drive of a woman who then produce perfectly binary children.  That is their idea of perfect society.

Human normalcy had to be "standardized", medically and psychologically.  A normal human has functional limbs, easily identifiable genitalia, a binary gender identity that matched physical genitalia and gender behaviour according to their side of the binary as identified through visual sex.   Those who do not are abnormal, not fully human, inferior and must be cured, re-educated or purged.    Today's society has only abolished the last and barely protested the first. At birth a doctor glances to see which category of the binary we are on and that becomes our official status in society.

Today's society does not fit that strict binary image.  The family is not a perfect binary family, the individuals are not perfectly binary and neither are the couples.  This is the war that is waging not simply between the LGBT community and the religious fundamentalists but between the binary fundamentalists and singles, unmarried couples, non-binary aka non-nuclear families, feminists, the poor, immigrants and the races. 

We are not immune. The LGBT or GLBT or TLGB or whatever letter you wish to put first or exclude entirely is not in the fight alone.  We are simply focused on one hillside to be captured or lost and the outcome will impact all of society.  When Prop 8 is finally struck down parents everywhere will finally have full equal rights and hopefully, the gender privilege of parenting will legally end.  The major threat to families in society is not non-binary individuals and couples, it is the binary itself.

The incorrect information provided to us at a young age that we must adhere to certain social rules based on visual sex and that all those we encounter will behave according to these social rules.  Yes, even in same-sex relationships.  The social rule society perpetuates that gay people are promiscuous, body conscious, vain, materialistic and habitually fit or that all women love and nurture babies and men do not.  That is the number one cause of divorce; the inability to get to know the individual we date in lieu of what society tells us they should be, act and believe. 

No wonder after 16 years of marriage some people realise not only are they married to an utter stranger but they are also a stranger to themselves.  It is also why the younger generation cannot seem to last more than 1 year married.  They have no patience with the pretense that older couples adopted years ago in order to create the illusion of that perfect binary family.  In order to have a solid family and relationship we must be true to, and happy with, ourselves.  One day society may finally realise that there is no man and wo-man; there is only human.

The Study Tony Perkin's Keeps Misquoting: Reproductive Urge, Rights, Gender, Sex and Sexual Orientation

This may come as a shock. Reproductive urge is dependent upon the individual not gender, sex, or sexual orientation. Some of us have absolutely no urge to have children, which is why we have seen many relationships end due to one individual in the couple who has the reproductive urge while the other does not. Whether it is to have a child by way of sex, in-vitro, adoption, or surrogacy.

It does not matter if we are gay, straight, bisexual, trans gender, married, single, male or female (although I believe trans gender falls under male or female); some of us just need to nurture. To parent. It is devastating to realise that in many states that right to reproduce, to nurture, to be a parent, is denied.

Not due to any parental deficiency. There are disabled, addicted, incarcerated, abusive, and other biological parents with mental health issues. Nothing these parents have done, or are physically unable to do, bars them from their reproductive right, and should not, unless they have physically hurt their children. Yet some gay and straight individuals are not granted reproductive rights due to bigotry against individuals who are "socially infertile".

The current argument for barring those who are "socially infertile" is that children need two parents. I will agree that the ideal would be a two (employed) parent household. Not a specific heterosexual two parent household. Simply a two parent household regardless of sex, gender and sexual orientation that has the income along with emotional stability needed to raise a child. There is a unique difference between mother or father and parent. Anyone can be a mother or father. It takes a special person to be a parent. A parent bases all decisions due to the well being of the child.

A parent will not get married to provide a mother or a father to a child based on societal belief, or simply due to the love that person has for the parent. A parent will get married to another parent. Another person who will also base their decisions on the well being of the child. Who loves that child.

The one thing in the study everyone keeps quoting from, Charting Parenting: A Statistical Portrait of Mothers and Fathers in America, was that it had NOTHING to do with marriage. It was a study on Parenting. I had looked it up previously in 2006 while answering a man going through a heterosexual divorce in a bid to make sure his ex-wife did not cut him out of their child's life. Something for his attorney to use in court. It stated that children with two parents (divorced, single or married) do better than children who have only one parent involved in their lives. It defined a parent as:

Who is a parent? This answer is not as obvious as one might think. Definitions of parenthood can include genetic, legal, and practical criteria. Throughout this report we do not use any single definition of parenthood. For this indicator, however, we define parenthood in two ways: genetically (have you ever had a biological child), and practically (are you living with your own child under age 18, regardless of the type of relationship). Both measures have their limitations: the genetic definition does not say anything about the current relationship, and is doubtless under-reported for men; the practical definition adopted here leaves out nonresident parents of minor children, an important group. Together, however, they give us a good starting point for the report.

The part that is taken out of context states that:

Marriage is one of the most beneficial resources for adults and children alike. Children in married parent families tend to have fewer behavior problems, better emotional well-being, and better academic outcomes, on average, than children in single parent or divorced families.

Gay couples are NOT single parents or parents in a divided and/or conflicted household. In the same paragraph it also states:

Marriage is less beneficial for children’s emotional and behavioral well-being in families marked by high parental conflict. Fathers’ attachments to their children are often contingent upon marriage - fathers tend to disengage from children they no longer live with, making less frequent visits and calls to them over time.

And in regards to Divorce:

Divorce is linked to behavior problems among children, including depression, antisocial behavior,
impulsive/hyperactive behavior, and school behavior problems. It places daughters at greater risk of having nonmarital births. Often these outcomes are the result of the processes that are set into motion when parents divorce.

Children living with one parent are more likely to have household income below the poverty line than children living with both parents, and these children are often uprooted to new neighborhoods and schools supported by fewer financial resources. Spending time in a family that is not headed by two married parents increases the likelihood that a child will experience subsequent changes in his or her family status. Thus, changes in a child’s family situation can cause short-term instability and also interrupt important pathways for a child’s social-economic well-being in adulthood.

I would love to suggest reading the study in it's entirety.

Charting Parenting: A Statistical Portrait of Mothers and Fathers in America
http://www.childtrends.org/files/ParenthoodRpt2002.pdf