Asexuality

I didn't have sex until I was 20. I just didn't want to have sex before that. I met men i fancied, but i didn't want sex. I didn't feel any pressure to do so either.

I prefer fwb and casual relationships to a long term steady relationship too. For lots of reasons.

It didn't need a label. And I didn't need to be put in a category box that I would have to either remain in because I'd nail my colours to a mast or scramble sheepishly out of at some point either.

It just seemed to make sense and be, I don't know, kinda 'normal' for people to be both different to each other and to change across their lifetime.

The issue is that now teens and 20somethings feel the need to label and categorise every single aspect of their personality, character, individual differences as 'something', all of which contributes to their 'identity' and, from what I can see, is very restrictive rather than liberating.

Of course we understand "what it is like to be a teenager/20-something who has no sexual desire", and what it is like to be older than that with no sexual desire. It is a very normal, common experience.

Making it into a personal identity just reinforces the idea that there is something exceptional and different about it and thereby increases the pressure on people in general to buy into the current fashions around sex led by porn, the commodification of sexuality and the dominance of a particualr kind of male norm in relation to desire .

It should be enough to just say 'no'. You shouldn't have to construct an 'identity' that justifies 'no' and makes it your essence, or part of your essence.

And as for understanding ""what it is like to be a teenager/20-something who has ... no sexual identity", well I certainly understand that because I don't have a sexual identity -- any more than I have a 'literature identity' because I like reading certain types of books at a certain frequency. Not everything is an identity.

I am not convinced kids in primary school are being pressured to commit to an identity on any great scale, but some kids in late primary, who are 10 and 11 years olds are starting to think about it. Not all though by any means, and I definitely dont think theres any shame at primary for not being interested in relationships. The pressure def steps up in year 7 and 8 though at secondary, but I honestly think most of them are still pretty fluid and undecided though. There are plenty of kids who are into other things such as sport or whatever. I dont think its massively different to when I was at school in that respect, although theres definitely much more acceptance of gay kids, and therefore more of them are realising they are gay or bisexual much earlier. When I was at school, gay was mainly an insult and the idea of bisexuality was something id never heard of or even thought was a possibility, despite me realising thats what I was as an adult. Would have been great to have realised that earlier

I don’t think I’m doing any more than eyerolling, and I certainly wouldn’t even do that if I were in the presence of a vulnerable young person who called themselves a demi greysexual ace, or whatever. I actually had a young friend a couple of years back who used exactly that description of herself and I was very supportive of her struggles to find a place in the world (she’s now a happily partnered lesbian, by the way).

I do think there can be harm in these labels, however. As others have said, they implicitly present as a ‘norm’ the idea that most people are sexually insatiable and up for it with anyone who crosses their path, and wants to do what ubiquitous internet porn tells us is satisfying sex, all the time. These are damaging messages for women, in particular, to hear.

That was meant to have a question mark at the end

Why do you think I don’t feel compassion for those who call themselves asexual

@justawoman - it's great that in your day being a late developer was not a source of shame and that you are now very happy with your sexual identity. However, can you not find even a smidgeon of compassion for those whose lives have been more difficult in this respect?

As @loopsdefruit said earlier, identifying as asexual or demisexual does not involve forcing one's way into spaces that belong to the other sex, or any of the aggressive behaviours associated with transgenderism at its worst. You may roll your eyes at it, but where on earth is the harm?

Also to add, i think these people really don’t even want to understand.

They have very rigid world views and whoever doesn’t fit in it, have to be ridiculed, for whatever reason.

Only it goes above teenage/20’s.
It’s for lifetime.

This is caused by the pressure on kids as young as primary age (when if they’re pre puberty they will be pretty much asexual!) to decide which box they fit in and identify themselves accordingly. In fact sexual desire, practice, and attraction both waxes and wanes over the course of most people’s lives, and can be really very fluid and changeable at different life stages. We need to stop telling kids they need to identify their sexual identity while they’re still in primary school, and start letting them grow and develop naturally.

I agree. Children, and many young people, would be expected to be "asexual".

It's obviously different for adults.

This is caused by the pressure on kids as young as primary age (when if they’re pre puberty they will be pretty much asexual!) to decide which box they fit in and identify themselves accordingly. In fact sexual desire, practice, and attraction both waxes and wanes over the course of most people’s lives, and can be really very fluid and changeable at different life stages. We need to stop telling kids they need to identify their sexual identity while they’re still in primary school, and start letting them grow and develop naturally.

I agree though that it makes no sense for people to identify as asexuals if they have fancy other people, have a sex drive and are enjoying regular sex. That is just odd.

I do wonder how many of the people on this thread who are sneering at asexuals/demisexuals have any understanding of what it is like to be a teenager/20-something who has no sexual desire or sexual identity. It feels very isolating and shameful. Much as you may think asexual/demisexual are terribly precious as labels, they are so much better than "frigid" or "abnormal".

Yes of course it would be great if we as a society could realise that sex drive fluctuates massively between and within people and that that is perfectly normal, but we are a long way from that point.

As WeeBisom said, asexual used to mean you didn’t feel sexual attraction; you didn’t feel sexual desire; and you did not have [consensual] sex. The only reason you need[ed] to talk about it was if you wanted to enter into a romantic relationship; & sometimes I suppose women might [have] mention[ed] it to HCPs in the context of explaining how it is they really REALLY do absolutely know for certain they’re DEFINITELY not pregnant & when they say they’re not having sex and haven’t had sex they do indeed really mean at all ever. Yes, “a pretty girl like them”. Support groups & university societies (etc) transforming into LGBTQIA “spaces” was that well-intentioned thing of extending resources to small groups who didn’t really fit there but needed somewhere...

Thing is, as we’ve seen on this thread it’s now evolved into an absolutely meaningless label. Furthermore, all the “asexuals [can] totally have lots of sex” business means that people who are asexual in that traditional sense (& frequently it’s not just some kind of polite “no thank you” to sex, it’s actual active revulsion at the mere idea; & a body that doesn’t Get On Board with the “right” physical responses to sex) & might want to try to pursue a relationship are, despite this seeming explosion in the asexual population & the waving of an actual flag honestly fortunes are to be made with all the associated environment-wrecking gubbins going to struggle to find a partner who feels the same way. And as we’ve seen elsewhere, asking too many questions is no longer allowed; & certainly you cannot say something that might make someone feel “invalid”, which in fact leaves the most vulnerable people of the subset vulnerable. (As it were.) To be clear, obviously nobody should be going about abusing other people; but we now seem to have tipped over to the point that saying things like “doctors are highly qualified experts” will get you torn to shreds in some online spaces. Big ones, I mean - so it can happen on Twitter, for example, in the same way other tweets sometimes get picked up & slammed down.

There is such a desperately worrying trend for needing endless labels - & seeking to identify as oppressed, too. The endless labels allow the construction of communities; but then No GaTeKeEpInG and EvErYoNe Is VaLiD now underpin everything & the people those communities were originally for end up talked over &/or pushed out (eg online spaces for discussion of/sharing resources to help with autism).

Sometimes it feels as if Instagram is to blame - labels to build a bio with; then hashtags to build a community; then chasing likes & wanting to build follower count & ideally become An Influencer. If you can’t be packaged to fit in a pigeonhole Who.Even.Are.You? (and obviously obviously none of it’s as simple as that, but all the social media stuff - Tik-Tock more than Insta now, of course - is very clearly hugely important in constructing identities in the C21 & communities & communication & conflict...).

For avoidance doubt, given section, am regular MNer, though Lurk FWR, & NCd for this post. Am not going to list things people list when they think they’re showing they’ve been on here for ages, because that’s silly & just shows you’ve seen a post like that & can C&P.

Sexually not securely!

It seems to me that some people are using asexual as a synonym for celibate or not securely interested in this particular person or not interested in a sexual relationship currently.

It's as ridiculous as applying labels such as demi sexual or whatever it is to describe wanting to know a person before having sex with them too.

There's not a history of beating people who are asexual up.

Exactly. An in fact there is the opposite history: Women have often been expected/required to be asexual (in addition to being required to have sex with whichever males claim the right). They have been persecuted and shamed (and beaten, and stoned to death etc etc) if they show an interest in sex.

Now they are persecuted and shamed if they don't show an interest in sex (as well as, paradoxically, still being shamed for liking sex).

None of this requires a label/identity to rectify it. The solution is simply for people to recognise the autonomy and difference of others and not to project their own needs/fantasies/judgements onto the objects of their sexual gaze.

I'm not sure where the idea comes from that there is something all that unusual about not feeling strong sexual attraction to individuals, but still being interested in sex. Or why that would have anything to do with being asexual.

The way people experience sexual attraction and desire are so varied. Not only between individuals but over time.

It seems all very naval gazing.

The other thing that is male centric is that women have way more things in their lives that impact their sexual desire and even preferences.

And finally. Loads of people around the world, usually women and girls, have no choice about who they have sex with and when. Child marriage etc. Whatever their sexuality. That feels like a major sexuality issue but again never touched l on.

When it comes to asexual. I struggle to see why it needs the same activism as gay/ lesbian. I don't think it's ever been illegal. There's not a history of beating people who are asexual up. Today I saw some stuff about LGB 'excluding' asexual people. But it's just not the same is it. The problems are different.

Not RTFT so may be repeating things!

The sexuality options (ever growing) seem to take as a starting point a male perspective and a very specific one at that- a fuck anything that moves type of view.

EG
'DemisexualPeople on the asexual spectrum who do experience some sexual attraction, but only in certain situations, like after they’ve formed a strong emotional or romantic connection with a partner.'

????

This needs a label? It's perfectly standard for loads of people, not a niche preference needing a special name!

'Fluid
Some people describe themselves as sexually fluid. A person who is fluid experiences their sexuality or sexual identity as changing over time or in different contexts rather than having one finite way they experience attraction.'

Again, this is just a well known and standard way to feel.

I have never seen a label for 'very randy and not discerning, will fuck anything that moves'. There may be one but it's never on the lists. Hmmmm.