Asexuality

[shirkbot]

I'm reading you loud and clear mate. I just have one question. You said hetero/gay/bi/pan all still apply. If you don't mind me asking, which one of these apply to you? Because I don't think you can be, hetero/gay/bi/pan and demisexual at the same time, it just doesn't make sense. There's an orientation (gender) which you aim at, demisexual/grey-a seems more like a condition or a kink (emotionally close, rich, older, younger, asian, tall, short, strong, door-mat, sadist, etc), albeit more of a... uh... hardline pre-requisite with no exceptions.

Although I do get what you're saying with the light switch though, you're saying "it's physically impossible to get aroused unless I'm emotionally attached to the person" right? I can understand that. If everyone in the world worked that way it'd be a much better place.

I mean in the end it doesn't effect me or anyone else but you and other people who identify similarly, I'm just glad I've gotten more of an understanding of this from you. What I would like to discuss are the logical problems I've mentioned in the first paragraph, if we hash it out over that, I think we could both learn something.

Hmm... How to clarify... Well, in a way it's a bit like stage scenery: In the Theater of my personal attraction Asexual and Heterosexual will alternate being in the foreground and Demisexual just exists in the background. It's really only a sexuality in that it describes a pattern of sexual attraction, but it defines "on/off" while gender attraction is controlled by whatever controls romantic pursuits. Again, asexuals can and do have romantic relationships and have their gender preferences. It's all rather strange, but as you said, there's no reason it needs to be a big deal to anyone that's not directly involved.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

And considering what kind of hissy-fit the gaming community just threw over the label 'gamer' and how important that identity is to them I'd hope they'd then understand the importance of an identity.

I may be six pages too late, but oh my god yes. Especially considering I'm seeing a large number of prolific gamergaters complaining about asexuals wanting to be a part of a community of like minded individuals.

Seriously, are we going to go to have to go through this whole debacle every time people realize that there are groups of people who aren't the same as them? It sounds like people complaining "Hey, I've already went and accepted gay people, what more does the world want from me?" like they're the people being inconvenienced by the world being full of minorities who have different problems than they do.

I can't fathom what it'd feel like to have gender dysphoria, but I don't go around telling transexuals that they're not real and just want to be special little snowflakes. I can't imagine what it'd feel like to have severe arthritis and being able to feel my bones grinding against each other, and even though I have no visual proof that people suffer from it I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt that they're not deliberately trying to fake it for attention.

In fact, this thread is a perfect example about why awareness about asexuality is needed. The amount of people who believe asexuals are just deluding themselves is a testament to that. As much as love this community at times, it's never shied away from justifying the need for social change by example. I've said this before, but if it wasn't for The Escapist (both the supporters and detractors) I would still think that feminism was bollocks

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I'm all for social support for the fostering of autonomous individuals... as I believe anyone and everyone has the right to be as true to their human character, as long as said human character abides by basic social conventions set in Mill's utilitarianist theory (aka the Harm Principle). However I doubt such 'Awareness' will likely mean 'change'. Don't get me wrong, I believe there should be disability awareness, trans* awareness, homosexual awareness, etc. But I don't exactly see the necessity of asexual awareness?

Why? It ranks up there with 'Self-managed Superannuation' awareness, in my opinion. Being asexual is a negative stimuli social/biological identity ... not a positive stimuli social/biological identity. For example, ignoring trans* identity rights can lead to severe (and most criminal, unnecessary) psychological impairment. As does ignoring homosexual rights to sexual expression ... but you don't wear asexuality in a positive stimuli effect. It's not a disability, impairment or a condition of an enforced social convention.

For example, disability awareness makes sense, as it brings to light the needs of individuals to be given equal access to medicine, social services and education. But I doubt being asexual will keep you out of college, or cause immense psychological distress ... as there are no social conventions on forcing you to fuck. There are social forces telling you WHO to fuck, and how to present yourself, but never have I seen social forces telling you to fuck and "be fucked RIGHT NOW ... or else".

Don't get me wrong, it's nice ... but it may be a case of existential ennui brought about by observing the nature of the world, or apathy to feel brought about by growing older in a society that continues to be needlessly cruel, but I cannot help feeling like ... 'meh'? I don't know how to describe it ... it's a persistent 'meh' feeling.

(Addendum: I originally wrote 'symptom', rather than 'stimuli', in the second paragraph ... I do apologize for this error)

 

[Mezahmay]

I may be six pages too late, but oh my god yes. Especially considering I'm seeing a large number of prolific gamergaters complaining about asexuals wanting to be a part of a community of like minded individuals.

Seriously, are we going to go to have to go through this whole debacle every time people realize that there are groups of people who aren't the same as them? It sounds like people complaining "Hey, I've already went and accepted gay people, what more does the world want from me?" like they're the people being inconvenienced by the world being full of minorities who have different problems than they do.

I've been staying clear of this forum for a while myself, but I doubt for the same reason as you. Initially it just felt a little "me too" with all the other sexuality and gender threads out these days. There's seriously people in the gamergate community who want to exclude asexual people? Given the general lack of awareness I have a hard time believing that. However, I have no evidence to refute your claim and really I don't care enough to look into it.

All I know is my lack of sexual attraction for others has come up so infrequently everyone assumes I'm straight. I think it's kinda funny whenever it does come up though since others immediately go to gay first. It's that reason right there I have a hard time thinking of the asexual community as a minority since the stigma for not wanting sex is negligible compared to same-sex relationships or gender identities not aligning with physical sex.

However I doubt such 'Awareness' will likely mean 'change'. Don't get me wrong, I believe there should be disability awareness, trans* awareness, homosexual awareness, etc. But I don't exactly see the necessity of asexual awareness?

You're not alone. I doubt this thread was designed to change anything as there isn't really much to change. However, if someone who doesn't realize this is a thing realizes it describes them, then that's one less societal pressure to deal in the future if such things still matter to this hypothetical reader.

 

[Something Amyss]

I may be six pages too late, but oh my god yes. Especially considering I'm seeing a large number of prolific gamergaters complaining about asexuals wanting to be a part of a community of like minded individuals.

If there's one thing you should take away from GamerGate, it's that standards are completely different when it's someone else's team.

 

[likalaruku]

Aromantic with Aesthetic Attraction to both genders & watches gay porn of the opposite gender. Is there even a name for this kind of sexuality? I'll go with "asexual bicurious fujoshi."

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

You're not alone. I doubt this thread was designed to change anything as there isn't really much to change. However, if someone who doesn't realize this is a thing realizes it describes them, then that's one less societal pressure to deal in the future if such things still matter to this hypothetical reader.

Oh, that's nice ... originally I thought I was being a narcissistic iconoclast arsehole. I had a problem describing it before, but I think I have a good means now. 'Asexuality' doesn't feel like something I should jump into the trenches for. 'Trans* rights' ... yeah, hells yeah (partly due to personal bias, but on philosophical grounds also), gay rights? Yeah ... I'll be a bannerman for gay rights. Asexuality? Yeah, well ... there's nothing really to fight for, there's no clear and present enemy to rally against.

Maybe it's a weakness of human character that in order to fight for equality you need a universal enemy.

Perhaps it may alleviate the pressures of a few ... but I honestly don't see what pressures there are to begin with. If you don't like a world that cherishes sex, well that's not exactly going to change given we are animals first and foremost. Animal lusts and desires, and thanks to complex language and reason, have dragged ourselves out of simple, base principles of existing. You can take the human out of the jungle, but not the jungle out of the human.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

I may be six pages too late, but oh my god yes. Especially considering I'm seeing a large number of prolific gamergaters complaining about asexuals wanting to be a part of a community of like minded individuals.

Seriously, are we going to go to have to go through this whole debacle every time people realize that there are groups of people who aren't the same as them? It sounds like people complaining "Hey, I've already went and accepted gay people, what more does the world want from me?" like they're the people being inconvenienced by the world being full of minorities who have different problems than they do.

I've been staying clear of this forum for a while myself, but I doubt for the same reason as you. Initially it just felt a little "me too" with all the other sexuality and gender threads out these days. There's seriously people in the gamergate community who want to exclude asexual people? Given the general lack of awareness I have a hard time believing that. However, I have no evidence to refute your claim and really I don't care enough to look into it.

All I know is my lack of sexual attraction for others has come up so infrequently everyone assumes I'm straight. I think it's kinda funny whenever it does come up though since others immediately go to gay first. It's that reason right there I have a hard time thinking of the asexual community as a minority since the stigma for not wanting sex is negligible compared to same-sex relationships or gender identities not aligning with physical sex.

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. A lot of people I regularly see posting pro-gamergate stuff are posting in this thread criticizing asexuals for wanting to have a label for their lack of interest in sex and a flag like they're some sort of community or something. In light of how pissed off people became about the label "Gamer" being tarnished by various publications, it seems a teensy bit hypocritical.

I may be six pages too late, but oh my god yes. Especially considering I'm seeing a large number of prolific gamergaters complaining about asexuals wanting to be a part of a community of like minded individuals.

If there's one thing you should take away from GamerGate, it's that standards are completely different when it's someone else's team.

Resisting... urge... for snappy... response...

Alas, I better just tuck this one away, I really don't want to see this become another branch of the nebulous gamergate discussion

I assure you, it would have been good though. Really inflammatory too

------

Anyways I forgot to say this in my first post, but this is a topic I really didn't know much about and the OP was really informative.

Kudos to Eclipse for the topic and keeping her[sub](?)[/sub] head amidst all of the lovely comments this thread has been graced with

 

[DarkRawen]

Well, I'm sorry that my opinion will be seen as an attempt endorse the status quo, if that is even your point?

I find it kind of strange you had no problem putting words in my mouth, but when I am explicit, it's only then that you're unsure of my point and I'm suddenly "here and there."

Why divide people further?

Why is acknowledging difference divisive to you? According to your own posts, you have done just that.

I honestly don't get what you're talking about with the applying yourself equally, since it's written so that it can be interpreted in a whole bunch of ways. If you'd like to reword it, please do.

Dear Lord, this is intentional, isn't it?

You don't practice what you preach. Simple as. For all your talk about how you feel this way, you don't show up in hetero threads and start preaching. Of course, if you do, go ahead and prove it. Show me examples.

The thing I found rude was that you chose to point out me and another in a way that made it seem like we were deliberately misquoting you.

You omitted words and responded to something with a completely different meaning. You still appear to be sticking by that. I'm not particularly sure why I wouldn't think it was intentional. Hell, it worked within the context you chastised me for not using. One you're continuing to go on about me not using. IT looked deliberate and still looks deliberate.

At no point did I say that people aren't attacked over it.

I missed the point where I claimed otherwise. Are you once again misconstruing me?

Finally, I am trying to understand the reasoning behind the flags and the different groups, not dismiss the fact that people want them, or feel like they are necessary.

Weird how when I addressed it, that was not a big part of your response, then. Weird how you keep reciting your experience, especially if it's not your intent to portray it as typical and you're aware of how it can come off.

I'm sorry, I have absolutely zero faith in your sincerity.

But hey. People who feel like they're in a group of one like knowing they're not alone. Suicide rates among LGBT youth are huge, and part of it is because they are alone and isolated. To use your own terminology, they're already divided. I admittedly don't know how rare asexuality is, but it has even less media coverage, less popular portrayal, so I imagine it's quite lonely. So yes, a flag, a symbol, a term, they all equal knowing you're not out there on your own. Being able to identify things helps. And you know what? I didn't need a flag or a rally cry or a slogan or a symbol, but I'm capable of understanding it helps. Much of this should be self-evident just through a basic sense of empathy.

But then, I'm not adding new information here.

From the outside, having seen this explained already, you come off as lacking empathy for people who weren't in your position. And that's only if I get charitable and take you seriously. I'm honestly not sure I should. Your whole ordeal comes off as "pfft, I didn't have any trouble." It comes off that way even after you explained yourself.

Listen. Please stop putting words and meanings in my mouth, especially as you seem to get really angry every time someone else makes the mistake of misunderstanding/being unable to even know what you're writing.

I wrote about my experiences as a way to show why I see things as I see, to show why my view is what it is. People's perspectives are without a doubt coloured by what they see around them, and I was trying to show that; "okay, but my perspective is coloured by the fact that I've found that being private about it is preferable, so I'd like to see something that proves otherwise."

Yet, you twist my words, say that I come off as doing one thing, then in the next moment, you get defensive and say; "Hey, where did I claim that?".

This isn't a discussion anymore, this is you saying that I seem to be lacking empathy, or even that I'm not even serious. Why? Are my experiences not real? Did I call someone the wrong thing? Is it really so bad for someone to show a different experience than a bad one?

Of course, I could reply to the rest of your questions, but most of them are you twisting my words, and the rest are you accusing me of being a hypocrite. I have been replying to other questions that people have asked me. Even questions I weren't comfortable with, as I said, I am a private person. I've been asked about my personal life, and went out of character and replied because I wanted to be respectful. No, I don't go into hetero-threads, and not most diversity threads either. I typed up a reply here because there were so many further divisions to the asexuality that I didn't understand why they need to be there, and the flags. Basically, I had a question.

While some have attempted to reply to that question, the only thing you've done is to be hostile. I should have trusted my instincts and just left it be in the first place, because you will not guilt me into doing anything by deciding what I'm saying, and what my message is.

 

[Vault101]

Perhaps it may alleviate the pressures of a few ... but I honestly don't see what pressures there are to begin with. If you don't like a world that cherishes sex, well that's not exactly going to change given we are animals first and foremost. Animal lusts and desires, and thanks to complex language and reason, have dragged ourselves out of simple, base principles of existing. You can take the human out of the jungle, but not the jungle out of the human.

I kinda disagree here...in that for me its not an issue of "can you?" but "why would you want to?"

granted people who try celibacy might find it tough (not that some people can't some people just aren't all that into sex and they aren't nessarcyly asexual) and I'm sure some people would love to do away with the urge altogether if they could

but sex isn't an inherently bad thing, or it doesn't have to be

I bring this up because I feel this "naturalistic" view can be used to justify all kinds of bad behaviour

 

[Zak757]

I assume asexuals were people with no sex drive, but this thread gave me the idea to spend the night educating myself. It turns out I'm not a really bizarre heterosexual, but that I'm asexual. From the sounds of it my libido is "undirected" and this is pretty common for asexuals. This clears up a lot of questions I had about myself, so thanks.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I kinda disagree here...in that for me its not an issue of "can you?" but "why would you want to?"

granted people who try celibacy might find it tough (not that some people can't some people just aren't all that into sex and they aren't nessarcyly asexual) and I'm sure some people would love to do away with the urge altogether if they could

but sex isn't an inherently bad thing, or it doesn't have to be

I bring this up because I feel this "naturalistic" view can be used to justify all kinds of bad behaviour

Right ... but for 99% of people, sex is fantastic. It is a natural impulse to be intimate with other people. I typically don't take the essentialist argument, but in basic critiques of survival and procreation I think it's apt to say people like to be intimate with others. At least physical intimacy, if not emotional or social intimacy. In the same respects if there is only enough food for one person to survive on a tiny island, and there are two people who washed up on its shores, I could reasonably argue that after enough time of deprivation and paranoia someone is going to snap and kill the other.

People do bad things largely out of perceptible necessity or ego ... whether that be kleptomaniacal behaviour or someone starving, stealing from a convenience store is still stealing. This is why justice is ('should e', if applying Hume's Guillotine) considered blind. As human nature isn't, on its own, inherently evil but governed by nature to survive and thrive regardless of the cost.

This is why we have statutory laws, mandatory punishments, and social services ... in the hopes that basic urges are contained by equal and opposite incentives and punishment not to give in to said urges.

So the nature of human equality (in terms of sexuality and gender identity, disaility services, etc) makes sense. But it's much harder to say asexuality is a necessity to measure it in terms of social justice systems ... I don't see any perceptible wrongs of common society that inflict upon asexual people. There is nothing to change, and there is no measure of one's mobility and human rights being hampened by being asexual.

So I don't understand what exactly I'm supposed to be aware -of-... it's like being aware of a person's birthday. The only person my awareness, or lack thereof, inflicts upon is the person having their birthday. But I doubt missing someone's birthday bash is considered some great social crime.

 

[Vault101]

At least physical intimacy, if not emotional or social intimacy. In the same respects if there is only enough food for one person to survive on a tiny island, and there are two people who washed up on its shores, I could reasonably argue that after enough time of deprivation and paranoia someone is going to snap and kill the other.
.

or they might fuck!

..because that's..that's what I would have said

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

or they might fuck!

..because that's..that's what I would have said

I guess? But I'm not sure of what the argument is anymore, though.

 

[Solbasa]

I just have a couple questions.

First of all, a few of you mentioned the term "genderfluid". I know I've heard it before, but what exactly does it mean?

Second, is it homophobic/transphobic/acephobic/etc. to simply not care what someone's sexuality is? I don't expect people to care about mine, since it's my business and not really anyone else's. Is it wrong to not care if someone make theirs known?

Third...

It's a pride thing, straight people also have flags, several different versions.

Really? There are flags for heterosexuality? What are they, and why do they exist? It's not like anyone needs to raise awareness of heterosexuality, I think everyone knows pretty damn well that it's a thing.

 

[Tarfeather]

Very nice post, OP. According to your definition, I can confidently confirm: My girlfriend can be said to be asexual.

In fact, your definition seems to be a lot fuzzier than the symptoms she has. She has apparently no libido whatsoever, thus no sexual attraction. And even then, she has never considered herself an "asexual"(doesn't even know the term).

If you have a libido, I think that's a very different situation. Yes, you might still not want to have sex or the like, but there would be different reasons, possibly ones that can be overcome in a relationship. If you lack a libido to begin with, there is very likely no possibility of ever leading a "normal" sex life.

So that's why defining "asexuality" as a type of sexual orientation makes sense to me: As with e.g. homosexuality, it's not something that can be "cured" or "changed", and it will have a heavy impact on your ability to lead a "normal" relationship.

Meanwhile, "not wanting to sleep with anyone unless you have a strong bond with them" seems like an entirely different issue.

 

[default]

Geez some people are really, really silly.

Just because someone doesn't have any desire for sexual relationships doesn't make them 'ill' or mean that they 'need help'. There are lots of other directions to take in this life other than the constant hunt for sex that society (and arguably nature) expects us to take. By that logic I also think that putting so much focus on sexuality (or pretty much ANY aspect of your being) is stupid.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I just have a couple questions.

First of all, a few of you mentioned the term "genderfluid". I know I've heard it before, but what exactly does it mean?

Second, is it homophobic/transphobic/acephobic/etc. to simply not care what someone's sexuality is? I don't expect people to care about mine, since it's my business and not really anyone else's. Is it wrong to not care if someone make theirs known?

Not really ... if anything, if everybody (keyword being 'everybody') didn't give a shit about sexual and/or gender identity, there would likely be no problems whatsoever. The problem is that people's personal lives have been a public domain for .... well, approximately since we invented common languages and religion.

Problem is, one person puts up a fuss about it, and others chime in, and then others more ... and suddenly what began as a personal life choice become a community wide shit-flinging tournament.

So, the truly enlightened opinion is a person who doesn't give a toss at all. The problem is that there are more than a few people entitled enough to believe they have a right to determine the nature and free will of others, so staying silent when such forms of bigotry emerge correlates into complicity ... and thus the cycle continues, over and over and over again.

Hence why we don't have nice things.

 

[vanwaros]

Asexual of 15+ years here. The reason you don't hear about us is many of us, each thinking themselves brilliant, individually came up with the term on their own after a long afternoon playing prefix/suffix salad games.

Theism is often described as a television with multiple "channels," each representing a different religion. Atheism is often described as simply turning that TV off, not tuning to another channel.

Asexuality, for many of us, is the same concept. The TV is off, and there's no real inclination to turn it on. As with atheism, something may show up at a later date to prove us wrong/shatter our worldview, but the chances of that happening are incredibly slim.

That aside, people are welcome to have their flags and such. And their lists. I see it all as unnecessary tumblr-isms for a TV collecting dust; simply not interested.

 

[Tarfeather]

Asexuality, for many of us, is the same concept. The TV is off, and there's no real inclination to turn it on

Interesting. How does that work for you, personally? You're being very vague, though I can understand, since it's a delicate topic.

Still, I'd be curious: Are you referring to sexual activity specifically, or do you just generally not get "turned on"? Are you by extension also not interested in romance?