Poll: Are There That Many Asexuals Here?

[Unchained_M]

I wonder how many Bisexuals there really are in the world... Hmmm....

 

[chaosyoshimage]

The internet is full of lies and half-truths.

The internet is kind of like Obi-Wan Kenobi...

 

[TheMagicLemur]

I think it's mostly users who don't feel like explaining their sexuality and just pick the closest option. I tend to call myself a romantic asexual rather than describe everything. Besides even if the terms people use aren't 100% accurate, it's the internet do you really need to know that much about a random person?

I think you make a good point. Everyone's sexuality is unique to them alone; human nature demands we crate arbitrary categories, so people just find the closest match.

And yeah, it's strange how we do that online; it's not like most people would walk into a store and go "So how many of you in here aren't really into sex?"

 

[viranimus]

You know what... every last one of you is wrong. NONE of you exist. You are all just a figment of my massive acid induced overdose that kills me and you all are just my life flashing before my eyes. Wow... says a lot about my life. Anyway....


Bet some of you havent thought about that in over a decade.

But in all seriousness.. really no need for such hostility over this topic I do not think..

 

[InsanityRequiem]

Why don't you tell me the scientific facts that support your "opinion" that asexuality doesn't exist then?

I have never made the claim that asexuality doesn't exist. Good job pulling shit out of your ass.

Yes, you got the right to say what you want. But here's the thing, what you say needs back up like what you're calling me out on. Otherwise, you are wrong.

Except I'm not. There's not enough scientific literature to classify asexuality as an actual sexual orientation. Also, sagepub? That's your go to website for scientific studies regarding asexuality? Lol. Just fucking lol.

I misquoted you, yes, and I was wrong on that. But you saying that everyone, on these forums, saying they are asexual are frauds. Something that has been proved wrong many times. To the point that it looks like you are trolling. Are you trolling? Maybe, maybe not. I will not judge you.

And you told me to pull scientific articles and that is what I did. SAGE Publications does academic journals on social sciences and humanities, in which their sexualities journals are tailored to what the title is. Sexualities. Does it cover purely asexuality? No. I looked through it, and they cover sexuality in all its forms. I pulled up scientific articles, and you are immediately denying them because of their source? An independent publisher of academic journals that goes through the same Peer Reviewed process as those of biology, astronomy, geology, etc.

Sexuality, including asexuality(or non-sexuality if that sounds better), is excessively complex. Altered both by hormonal wiring in the brain and how one grows up. Do I call myself an asexual? Yes, I do. But that does not mean I am a fraud, because of what you say.

 

[JemothSkarii]

I'd say 1% would be right, as for this site alone, I reckon there'd be 20 or so at least. As for people ACTUALLY being asexual or not, I used to think I was, but I find that I'm actually a Demisexual, but I don't doubt their existence.

 

[MetalMagpie]

I see no reason why they should be lying. Whether or not they'll be asexual forever is another question.

I think many of the people who say they are asexual just don't have an interest in dating right now and want a cooler term for it. So do you believe that the many people who claim to be asexuals (claim to have no desire for sex of any kind) really belong to this small psychological group?

That wikipedia quote makes no mention of asexuality having to be a permanent state. So why is it invalid to describe yourself as asexual until you reach a point in your life when you experience sexual attraction?

Everyone starts out asexual. You don't experience sexual attraction as a child! The age at which people start experiencing that sort of attraction varies a lot. (I knew people at school who were having sex at fourteen, but I didn't start having those sort of feelings at all until I reached nineteen.)

A small minority of people will never experience sexual attraction. But - by definition - you can't say for certain that someone is part of that group until after their death!

 

[axlryder]

When talking to others it's important to take the general connotations of a word into account, regardless of its factual meaning or objective accuracy. Heck, even a word which has neutral meaning in one setting could be seen as negative in another. I'd find this to be an example of the latter. I wouldn't have even brought it up, but the fact that you said "suffer from a biological defect" makes it almost seem as though you're being subtly inflammatory. I just don't want to see you unwittingly alienate yourself

Okay, going on thinking that I guess, but it doesn't change the fact that calling it a defect or an aberration sounds really, really rude. At least, it is to me.

Two things to cover here:

1) It's not an insult, it's simply a statement of biological fact. You can not like it all you wish, but the facts very rarely limit themselves to what we would like. Again, I will link it directly to albinoism. It's a genetic/developmental change that causes you to be different from the "average". It's neither good nor bad, it simply is.

2) If you're so uncomfortable with yourself and your sexuality that connotative derision that may or may not exist is enough to offend you, you may want to re-evaluate things. A bit of self-confidence does wonders for that kind of thing.

well, your first point really just reiterates your initial response towards Dragonizer despite me explicitly stating that the connotation of a word should be taken into account regardless of its technical accuracy. I don't think it was something to cover so much as needless repetition.

Now, presuming that a person taking issue with your diction, regardless of its connotation, is a result of their discomfort with themselves or their own sexuality is fairly baseless conjecture. What's more, some connotations are inherent within a word itself. Attempting to relegate an inherent connotation to potential interpretation makes little sense, as that's not how the majority of people are going to process words. Just go on a LGBT forum and ask them if calling homosexuality a defect comes off as rude and see how they respond.

You also never addressed your use of the word "suffer". Was that technically accurate too?

 

[Starik20X6]

Why do I get the feeling a sizeable portion of the people claiming to be asexual are just trying to justify their virginity?

 

[Casual Shinji]

I'm not taking anyone's claim to asexualty at face value.

Like it or not, humans are sexual beings. This has nothing to do with societal pressure, but with the simple fact that we're alive. It's in the core of our very being. And if you lack this, not because you're fighting society's obsession with it, or you're depressed, but because you genuinely just don't have it at all, then you can call yourself asexual.

My guess is that most people's claim to being asexual is simply out of spite because they feel society is pressuring them to be sexual, not because they truly don't feel any sexual desire.

And honestly, people who have absolutely zero urge for physical human contact of any kind, whether by trauma or just cuz, are sick in the head.

 

[Reggie Rock]

Why do I get the feeling a sizeable portion of the people claiming to be asexual are just trying to justify their virginity?

This is the reason i just tell people im straight. If I tell them im asexual, suddenly i'm just some loser who can't get sex.

I'm asexual because im simply not attracted to men or women. I don't find anything really sexually stimulating. I have been sexually stimulated before i decided i was asexual.Now i just don't feel attraction to people.

 

[Agayek]

well, your first point really just reiterates your initial response towards Dragonizer despite me explicitly stating that the connotation of a word should be taken into account regardless of its technical accuracy. I don't think it was something to cover so much as needless repetition.

Now, presuming that a person taking issue with your diction, regardless of its connotation, is a result of their discomfort with themselves or their own sexuality is fairly baseless conjecture. What's more, some connotations are inherent within a word itself. Attempting to relegate an inherent connotation to potential interpretation makes little sense, as that's not how the majority of people are going to process words. Just go on a LGBT forum and ask them if calling homosexuality a defect comes off as rude and see how they respond.

You also never addressed your use of the word "suffer". Was that technically accurate too?

First off, if you are really sensitive enough to be offended when a complete stranger disparages something about you, you're failing at life pretty epicly. Especially when said disparagement requires you to read subtext that may or may not be there.

When someone insults you, there are three possible outcomes. They are incorrect, they are correct but you like that part of yourself, or they are correct and you dislike that part of yourself. In the first two cases, you can summarily dismiss them as being an idiot. They are clearly either wrong or being stupid, either way they're not worth the time and effort to be annoyed at. In the third case, the only thing to do is to do something about it. If you honestly find it to be a problem, then change it.

None of these involve getting your panties in a twist. The only reason for someone to be offended by something a random stranger says is because the comment makes them uncomfortable with the aspect(s) of themselves in question. If you are secure and confident in who and what you are, the disapproval of the whole fucking world is meaningless. Thus, we can conclude that being offended by someone disparaging you stems from a lack of self-acceptance and far too much emotional investment in Joe Q Public's opinion.

And with regards to using "suffer": That's what happens with a defect. It is an imperfection that one has to deal with. One could also use "bear", "deal with", "put up with", etc. As mentioned before, it's a biological aberration, and as such is something one has to suffer through.

Whether or not that's a bad thing is entirely up to personal interpretation. I don't see it that way, but plenty of other people do apparently.

 

[Agayek]

I'm not taking anyone's claim to asexualty at face value.

Like it or not, humans are sexual beings. This has nothing to do with societal pressure, but with the simple fact that we're alive. It's in the core of our very being. And if you lack this, not because you're fighting society's obsession with it, or you're depressed, but because you genuinely just don't have it at all, then you can call yourself asexual.

My guess is that most people's claim to being asexual is simply out of spite because they feel society is pressuring them to be sexual, not because they truly don't feel any sexual desire.

And honestly, people who have absolutely zero urge for physical human contact of any kind, whether by trauma or just cuz, are sick in the head.

To be fair, a desire for physical contact and a desire for sexual contact are entirely different things.

For example, I myself feel no urge or need for physical (or even emotional, to be completely honest) closeness to anyone else, but I very much have a sex drive. For a bit more clarity: sex is awesome, hugs are meh. It's rather odd, I'll be the first to admit, and quite possibly contradictory, but there's really not a whole lot I can do about it.

 

[axlryder]

I'm not taking anyone's claim to asexualty at face value.

Like it or not, humans are sexual beings. This has nothing to do with societal pressure, but with the simple fact that we're alive. It's in the core of our very being. And if you lack this, not because you're fighting society's obsession with it, or you're depressed, but because you genuinely just don't have it at all, then you can call yourself asexual.

My guess is that most people's claim to being asexual is simply out of spite because they feel society is pressuring them to be sexual, not because they truly don't feel any sexual desire.

And honestly, people who have absolutely zero urge for physical human contact of any kind, whether by trauma or just cuz, are sick in the head.

I don't really see the purpose of adding that last part, as being asexual and desiring zero physical human contact of any are two completely different things. However, aversion to physical contact can be a completely physiological thing, thus making it inherent within the person themselves. While it usually results from developmental abnormalities, I don't really consider people with autism to be "sick in the head" for example.

 

[Panorama]

The internet is full of lies and half-truths.

This should be the first message that appears whenever anyone opens a Browser.

OT: I believe that every last person who has claimed to be asexual here is either blatantly lying to cover their wounded hearts or just haven't found anything they would regard as attractive (which I find to be acceptable due to "different strokes for different folks"). There are way too many people claiming to be asexual so it screams of immature self-delusion. In fact, of everyone who has claimed to be asexual on this site alone, only one or two are actually asexual. The rest are LIARS.

I can see that, i can never get my head around the matter honestly, i know people with a low sex drive but i don't know anyone who claims, to be asexual (i.e. not people on the internet). So yeah im having to agree here so well said.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Julianking93 already has a good reply on the kissing thing, so I'll address this one.

Yes, I view sex as something I neither want nor need and due to this, I have little to no sex drive. Which is pretty much exactly what asexuality is. My personal view on the act being gross doesn't mean I'm NOT an asexual. That's just ridiculous.

Christ you're being difficult. If asexuality is defined as having no sex drive, which for the record is usually caused by a number of issues and is rarely if ever "inborn", but you state that you are disgusted with sex then you are not asexual, you suffer from something called sexual aversion disorder.

snip

If by "spectrum" you mean classifying virtually every human emotion as a sexuality then bull fucking shit.

I replied with evidence to suggest that it is, in fact, feasible under the circumstances for this many asexuals to be on the Escapist.

Except it's not. Virtually every dope with low libido thinks of himself as being asexual just like every idiot in the world who behaves a bit anti socially thinks asperger's is the cause. Asexuality is much to complex of an issue and claiming that you're "asexual" without first considering virtually every other possible cause is being presumptuous at best and at worst it's nothing but a feeble attempt at gaining attention.

But you saying that everyone saying they are asexual are frauds

They are frauds. This isn't the first fad people have jumped on and this isn't the first time I've had this exact same discussion on a different subject.

And you told me to pull scientific articles and that is what I did. SAGE Publications does academic journals on social sciences and humanities, in which their sexualities journals are tailored to what the title is. Sexualities.

SAGE is to scientific literature what movie tie in books are to literature.

I pulled up scientific articles, and you are immediately denying them because of their source? An independent publisher of academic journals that goes through the same Peer Reviewed process as those of biology, astronomy, geology, etc.

If by peer reviewed you mean put up a poll on the internet and report the findings then sure, why not. If that's what passes for "peer reviewed" nowadays then I don't want to see what the future holds.

Sexuality, including asexuality(or non-sexuality if that sounds better), is excessively complex

I agree. It's a very complex issue. Unfortunately, you don't understand it. In fact, no one understands it. We've barely just scratched the surface, in fact we know fuck all about it, and people are already claiming they're "asexual". This is yet another "internet disorder" and just like the internet asperger's sufferer who self diagnosed his disorder, the bisexual who hasn't been in a same sex relationship and the pansexual who wouldn't touch a tranny with a 10ft pole you'll eventually fade into history and make way for the next big thing.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I'm not taking anyone's claim to asexualty at face value.

Like it or not, humans are sexual beings. This has nothing to do with societal pressure, but with the simple fact that we're alive. It's in the core of our very being. And if you lack this, not because you're fighting society's obsession with it, or you're depressed, but because you genuinely just don't have it at all, then you can call yourself asexual.

My guess is that most people's claim to being asexual is simply out of spite because they feel society is pressuring them to be sexual, not because they truly don't feel any sexual desire.

And honestly, people who have absolutely zero urge for physical human contact of any kind, whether by trauma or just cuz, are sick in the head.

I don't really see the purpose of adding that last part, as being asexual and desiring zero physical human contact of any are two completely different things. However, aversion to physical contact can be a completely physiological thing, thus making it inherent within the person themselves. While it usually results from developmental abnormalities, I don't really consider people with autism to be "sick in the head" for example.

I know not all asexuals have an aversion against physical contact, but I've heard from many that have, even one in this very thread. They basically classify any physical contact, whether it be a hug or a handshake, as vile.

And physical contact is extremely important in your life, even if it's something as simple as petting a dog.

 

[Phasmal]

I would have gone for the invisible third option: Who CARES?!

Seriously, though, if someone wants to say that they are asexual, how does it effect anyone at all? It might be unlikely to have so many people claiming to be asexual on one website but you have no way of measuring it, unless you wanna go to each persons house and put sensors around their downstairs. People claiming that asexuality is either wrong or impossible aren't going to change anything, people are still going to claim that they are asexual. Would someone saying sex is gross put you off sex? No! So why would you saying its natural and they must have SOME desire for it change what they think?

Honestly, lets all just grow up and leave people to do (or not do) with their downstairs as they wish.

 

[TheVioletBandit]

I think most of them are probably big fat liars. Everyone on this site claims to be an asexual genius with a doctorate in whatever the threads about, but in truth most of them (as far as I can tell) are simply English teenagers with (kind of sad and pathetic) delusions of grandeur.

 

[MartianWarMachine]

I used to think I was asexual, due to my lack of interest in doing... stuff... with other people, but then I took an arrow to the knee started to have a crush on an IRL friend, and I won't say any more because she's an Escapist and there's a tiny chance that she might read this post...

[sub][sub][sub]If you are reading it/have read it, don't tell me >~<[/sub][/sub][/sub]