Poll: Are There That Many Asexuals Here?

[Ilikemilkshake]

One percent is one out of a hundred (I know, duh). That means that you typically shouldn't see a person self-identify as asexual on the first page of any of those threads about sexuality that keep coming up around here.

Statistics doesnt work like that. Roughly 110million people own either a 360 or a ps3, Thats about 1.5% of the world population..So you wouldnt expect anyone on these forums to have a 360/ps3 on the first page?

You have to look at demographics, and apparantly this forum attracts a good number of people who arent just straight white males.

Not to be mean, but I don't buy that that many asexuals are here. A lot of people on the forums are young, many haven't had what they would call a romantic or sexual experience, and the Internet makes for great anonymity and lack of accountability. 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?

However im not saying your theory is wrong. Its reasonable to take everything on the internet with a grain of salt, so it could be that some who claim to be asexual just arent aware of their own sexuality yet, or dont even fully understand what asexuality actually means, while some could just be plain lying... but i still think the majority of people who claim to be asexual actually are.

 

[RanD00M]

There are a couple that I know who are genuinely asexual and find no interest in it but for the most part, the ones I've known simply attempt to make an excuse as to why they're single or can't get sex at all.
A defense, more or less.

That is just what I was about to add to my post, and now I don't have to. Thank you Julian.

 

[TimeLord]

There are no asexuals on these forums, period. The thing is, asexuality, like bisexuality, pansexuality and asperger's syndrome before it, is the new "in" thing. It's "cool" to be asexual, it adds depth to your character and makes you more interesting. It's also a great way to justify rejection. What these kids don't understand is that the prevalence of asexuality in the population of Earth is one fucking percent. Let me put that in perspective. The chances of a person on Earth being asexual is lower than the chance of you being hit by a fucking lighting bolt.

1% of 7 billion is still 70 million people. That's a lot of people. Chances are there is at least one on these forums. Probably more.
Please don't make baseless assumptions with information you don't have about the users of these forums.

 

[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.

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.

It's important to you and the majority of the human race because you've developed to need it. If one is never held as a child, they may grow up to have an aversion to physical contact. They might have a poorly developed mirror neurons and such. The point is, once they've developed past a certain point, it becomes ingrained into their psyche. It's no longer an abnormality to them, it's who they are. I'm not saying this is a good thing, but that doesn't make them "sick in the head" as you say, merely different from you or I.

 

[neoontime]

Well this is escapist, I don't see how you can compare a real world statistic to escapist when you should know already from being on this site for a year and a half.
TLDR: From me to everyone else, escapist attracts all kinds of weirdos.

 

[Starik20X6]

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.

Hence why I didn't say all. I'm fully aware that there are legitimately asexual people, but I've met some cases of dubious legitimacy. One guy claimed he was asexual right up until a girl spoke to him.

 

[Erana]

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.

Hence why I didn't say all. I'm fully aware that there are legitimately asexual people, but I've met some cases of dubious legitimacy. One guy claimed he was asexual right up until a girl spoke to him.

He wasn't implying that you were saying that asexuals aren't real, just pointing out the fact that this skepticism is something asexuals have to deal with pretty regularly.

And, at least from what I've seen, its unsurprising. There are an unfortunate number of people who claim to be asexual for convenience, and I don't hold it against people to not entirely believe me until they've gotten to know me better.

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.

OK, now I'm going to be just terrible and say that I'm an asexual who started grad school at 19.

But I wouldn't really call myself a genius or anything. In fact, I'm quite a forgetful goof!

 

[Agayek]

It's important to you and the majority of the human race because you've developed to need it. If one is never held as a child, they may grow up to have an aversion to physical contact. They might have a poorly developed mirror neurons and such. The point is, once they've developed past a certain point, it becomes ingrained into their psyche. It's no longer an abnormality to them, it's who they are. I'm not saying this is a good thing, but that doesn't make them "sick in the head" as you say, merely different from you or I.

To be completely fair, "sick in the head" is a colloquially term for strange and eccentric behavior. The definition of strange or eccentric: "not normal". Thus, someone behaving differently from the average is sick in the head. It's not really a negative.

Also, using the whole "normality is subjective" argument is completely ludicrous. Normality is, by definition, the average state. There's no such thing as subjective normality. For example, your everyday routine is familiar, but if it involves randomly punching strangers in the dick, it's certainly not normal. Confusing the terms doesn't help anyone.

 

[DazZ.]

Maybe we're all just so unattractive here that we put each other off sex.

 

[KnowYourOnion]

I think that's more like they haven't developed or made up they're mind about what sex means to them, or they simply don't know how they feel yet more than they are asexual.
As for me, I personally do feel attracted to women but I really don't want to have sex, it sounds weird, I mean I like the connection part of it and having dates because that's fun, but sex... it's just weird I guess I just don't want to, everything that's down there just seems disgusting to me, I just don't like the idea of it, I guess you could say that I'm just afraid of sex more than I'm asexual which is probably true and I can think of a reason why that would be but it's rather personal and I don't feel like telling everybody in the Internet about it.

You took the words right out of my.....fingers?!

It's nice to know there's someone in an equal state of confusion

 

[hazabaza1]

I'm guessing most of them are lying simply because they can't get into a relationship or just want to seem cool and unique.
The funny thing is everyone is so focused on being unique it seems more rare to find a straight white male on this forum.

 

[axlryder]

It's important to you and the majority of the human race because you've developed to need it. If one is never held as a child, they may grow up to have an aversion to physical contact. They might have a poorly developed mirror neurons and such. The point is, once they've developed past a certain point, it becomes ingrained into their psyche. It's no longer an abnormality to them, it's who they are. I'm not saying this is a good thing, but that doesn't make them "sick in the head" as you say, merely different from you or I.

To be completely fair, "sick in the head" is a colloquially term for strange and eccentric behavior. The definition of strange or eccentric: "not normal". Thus, someone behaving differently from the average is sick in the head. It's not really a negative.

Also, using the whole "normality is subjective" argument is completely ludicrous. Normality is, by definition, the average state. There's no such thing as subjective normality. For example, your everyday routine is familiar, but if it involves randomly punching strangers in the dick, it's certainly not normal. Confusing the terms doesn't help anyone.

no it's not a colloquial term for strange or eccentric behavior. It's more closely related to a state of insanity. Eccentricity fits, but that word can also denote insanity.

http://www.answers.com/topic/cuckoo if you look down in the synonyms it's right there in between stark raving mad and out of one's mind

it's true, confusing the term really doesn't help anyone. You should avoid that in the future.

 

[LilithSlave]

I think some are using it as a reason for virginity/single/unattractive/whatever.

Wait, you have to have an excuse to be virgin or single? You can't blame people for such a thing if being single and/or virgin is looked at as bad to begin with. People don't "need" to get laid, and asexuality or hyposexuality shouldn't be an excuse.

I am by no means asexual, by the way. But how some people seem to angst over not having sex at all is a mystery to me. In fact, people who act like getting laid is important, are gross to me. And people who equate worth as a human being and social skills with their sex life, are not only disgusting, but scary.

Also, is there any reason to be suspicious of asexuals? As if sex wasn't overrated enough, we question the motivations of self proclaimed asexuals. As if a lack of interest in sex or dating or anything needs to be questioned.

 

[Agayek]

no it's not a colloquial term for strange or eccentric behavior. It's more closely related to insanity and severe psychosis.

http://www.answers.com/topic/cuckoo if you look down in the synonyms it's right there in between stark raving mad and out of one's mind

it's true, confusing the term really doesn't help anyone. You should avoid that in the future.

To start, you didn't address anything on the second, and far more important, part of my statement.

Second, I'm going to link you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity

I'll even quote the first couple sentences to make it easier:

Insanity, craziness or madness is a spectrum of behaviors characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns. Insanity may manifest as violations of societal norms, including a person becoming a danger to themselves or others, though not all such acts are considered insanity.

The bolded bit is the important part. Behavioral patterns that diverge from the social norm are, by definition, insanity. It's a far more benign (I would argue completely problem free) form of insanity than the more widely known psychoses, and a desire to "treat" it seems a bit odd to me, but it still falls under the purview of mental illness.

Whether or not it's a bad thing to suffer from comes down to personal interpretation. I certainly don't see it as a negative.

 

[michiehoward]

If anyone between the ages of 12 to 25 says they are asexual[footnote]And since someone who is asexual has to go their entire life without the desire to have sex I should amend it to ages 12 to 85, only way to prove is not to have sex your entire life.[/footnote], I'm not likely to believe them. Just like I don't believe all teenagers and young adults are following their hormones like raging sex fiends, by through whatever virtue or vice are trying to get laid.

Portrayals in the media of young people are harsh, and chock full of stereotypes, I would understand if a young adult not dripping with hormones were to sit back and look at this and not want to painted with the same brush, or even associate with it.

 

[axlryder]

no it's not a colloquial term for strange or eccentric behavior. It's more closely related to insanity and severe psychosis.

http://www.answers.com/topic/cuckoo if you look down in the synonyms it's right there in between stark raving mad and out of one's mind

it's true, confusing the term really doesn't help anyone. You should avoid that in the future.

To start, you didn't address anything on the second, and far more important, part of my statement.

Second, I'm going to link you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity

I'll even quote the first couple sentences to make it easier:

Insanity, craziness or madness is a spectrum of behaviors characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns. Insanity may manifest as violations of societal norms, including a person becoming a danger to themselves or others, though not all such acts are considered insanity.

The bolded bit is the important part. Behavioral patterns that diverge from the social norm are, by definition, insanity. It's a far more benign (I would argue completely problem free) form of insanity than the more widely known psychoses, and a desire to "treat" it seems a bit odd to me, but it still falls under the purview of mental illness.

Whether or not it's a bad thing to suffer from comes down to personal interpretation. I certainly don't see it as a negative.

"In modern usage insanity is most commonly encountered as an informal unscientific term denoting mental instability"

from the same article

I'm going to assume that "out of one's mind" and "stark raving mad" would more likely denote mental instability than merely abnormal behavior. What's more, the term insanity has an inherently negative and dangerous connotation associated with it. I know you're not good with those, but they do actually affect people's perceptions and the general flow of conversation. It's why we call it an insanity plea and not an eccentricity plea, even though there's some technical overlap in the potential meaning of the two words.

as to the second part of your statement, it's irrelevant to the point I was getting across, as when I said it's "normal to them" I meant it wasn't way outside of the range of their normal behavioral pattern or indicative of erratic fluctuations is said pattern (which may indeed indicate mental instability).

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Unless there is a medical, physiological or serious psychological condition, anyone who claims to be asexual is lying. They might be lying to other people, they may be lying to themselves but whatever the reason for it, they are lying.

 

[Hosker]

Some may be correct, but I think there are those that just think they are through repression, or because they want to be so much that they try to convince themselves of it. I certainly feel life would be easier being asexual, but I can't lie to myself.

 

[Death Carr]

I identify myself as asexual, but I myself know thats not the case. I feel attraction towards members of the opposite sex and I desire to be in a relationship with them. However, I have had sex and found it a thoroughly unenjoyable experience and an experience that I dont want to have for the meanwhile.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

I am a nonsexual (a.k.a. asexual).
I was the 308503rd user to make an account on this site, and that was in March 2009.
1% of people are asexual, as you and wikipedia claims. 1 in 100.
So, when I joined, if we went by 1% of those users before me, we'd have, what, 3085 asexual users?
Since 2009, the amount of new users has increased. We now easily have over 500,000 unique accounts, and presuming that 1% of them are asexuals, that means at least 5000 asexuals are on this site.
So yeah, I'd say there really are that many of us here.
And we're more likely to post on a thread asking about people of our orientation, or lack thereof.

Edit: And no, I'm not a virgin, so you can throw that theory out.
I also have a boyfriend who I love very much.
I just lack any sort of sex drive/sexual attraction. I have romantic attraction, and that's about it.