Asexuality

[NettleTea]

So I know asexuality is a thing. Low sex drive diminishing to nowt. Or a low libido that often doesnt get airtime because the media would have it that its the normal state of affairs for everyone to be gagging for it 24/7

Or hand in hand with things like ASD

Or developes because you are in a sexually unfulfilling relationship and if you dont use it, etc.

It can come and go, or can be a constant

However Ive seen a fair bit of it being included now in teaching materials for schools, and I wondered if this was due to trying to normalise the absence of sexual feeling so that children who undergo hormone replacement and puberty blockers, and as a result have no developement of normal sexual feelings wont know that its not very unusual in teens/young 20s. Its only fairly recently that this loss/absence of sexual function/drive has been coming to light, and its only recently that teaching about asexuality has been included in the curriculum.

They are like retailers growing their product line to preserve demand.

This is an absolutely perfect description of how some organisations are operating. And it correlates as well to actual retailers growing their actual product lines. Anyone remember the budweiser flag glasses a few prides back? Every "identity" had its own glass, there were about 15 different flag branded glasses to chose from. It was a real light bulb moment for me as to why some people have such a strong interest in the concept of "identity". We're literally having each aspect of our personalities broken down into marketable chunks, branded, and then sold them back to us. I'm not saying that being asexual is a fad or anything btw, but the desire of (mostly young) people to label each facet of their personality as an "identity" is definitely being driven by commercial interest and marketing.

It's been known since forever that many people, for all kinds of reasons, don't have any sex, or much sex, or aren't very interested in the sex they do have, and all of this includes people in relationships or marriages. It used to actually be expected that many or most people would have some periods of their lives like this.

There has been a strain of pop culture for the last, maybe 50 years, that takes the view that all adults to be healthy and happy should be having a satisfying sex life, and there has also been a tendency to not realise that actually quite a lot of people are not having sex. At the same time there has been a loss of respect for deep friendships. People who believe all this tend to be young, or not very insightful, everyone else knows it's just false though they may feel badly they seem to be left out.

I can't help but think rather than rectifying the latter situation the whole asexual thing is actually buying into it.

@loopsdefruit

I do wish people wouldn't make comments questioning whether asexuality is a result of childhood trauma, sexual abuse etc... it feeds the narrative that sexual attraction is 'normal' and not experiencing it must make you broken. This is exactly what people said, and in some circles continue to say, about homosexuality and the justification used by many people for conversion therapy.

It's just a normally occurring difference, it's not super common, but it's not vanishingly rare either, it doesn't hurt anyone and is not a problem that needs to be solved.

There's no scientific basis for the claims you're making. People can make any comment they want.

@ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings

They are like retailers growing their product line to preserve demand.

This is an absolutely perfect description of how some organisations are operating. And it correlates as well to actual retailers growing their actual product lines. Anyone remember the budweiser flag glasses a few prides back? Every "identity" had its own glass, there were about 15 different flag branded glasses to chose from. It was a real light bulb moment for me as to why some people have such a strong interest in the concept of "identity". We're literally having each aspect of our personalities broken down into marketable chunks, branded, and then sold them back to us. I'm not saying that being asexual is a fad or anything btw, but the desire of (mostly young) people to label each facet of their personality as an "identity" is definitely being driven by commercial interest and marketing.

Yes ByGrabthars, it's commodification of identities.

on one hand, I think it could be to do with increased hormonal contraceptive and antidepressant use, and there might be lots of people that think theyre asexual but arent.
On the other hand, i think its actually quite useful to know, as I think if someone actually thinks about their level of sexual interest in general, then it could help avoid really unsatisfactory relationships

I’m sorry, I’m really trying but I just don’t get it. Being asexual doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t feel sexual desire. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t want to be in a partnered relationship. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t want to have sex. It doesn’t necessarily mean you have low or absent libido. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t masturbate or take part in other sexual activities. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t have sex. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t necessarily enjoy the sex you have .....

How on earth does any of this make you different from the average person who doesn’t call themselves asexual?

Gwen scientific basis for what? For sexuality being innate, for asexuality existing, for the fact that people have used the arguments that homosexuality was caused by abuse or trauma as a justification for conversion therapy?

Also yes, people can make any comment they want, I just said I wish they wouldn't.

I would hope that if I came along and said the same about homosexuality that people would report my comment as being homophobic or call me out on it.

People can say what they want, but as an asexual person I can also express the harm that views like that cause and say that I wish people wouldn't say that.

Also evidence would suggest about 2% of the population are asexual, so yes it is a normal variation and it is not common but also it's vanishingly rare.

I think its confusing when someone says theyre asexual but still like sex etc, or that asexuality is a spectrum. I dont think it is and I think that dilutes it.
Being demisexua grey romantic twice removed is bullshit, but being asexual in itself is useful to know

I also think the ubiquity of online dating has had an enormous impact on people's desire to self-categorise. This is why behaviours and personality traits that everyone kind of intuitively knew they were navigating pre-internet (like relative levels of sexual appetite or desire) have suddenly become Great Big Tribal Labels.

30+ years ago people met in person, felt some sort of attraction (instantaneously, or growing slowly over time), and dated. It was a process of trial and error, and loads of people discovered quickly or slowly that their initial attraction might not have legs over time. Now people online shop for what they want, so they need to be able to define what they're looking for. Therefore, they need to self-define first. In theory, this should save time.

However, I suspect that the online matching model isn't all its cracked up to be, either. When I think about what's made my own marriage work, it's a mix of compatibilities many of which we couldn't have articulated when we first met in our mid-20s. There just isn't really a shortcut for the process of finding out just how compatible you really are with someone over time.

so many good points being raised here

And yes, asexual seems to have completely morphed from its original definition of someone who felt no sexual desire.

And no, I dont believe that sexuality is fixed - I agree with previous posters who say that over time it changes and morphs - Im sorry, but someone at the beginning of their sexual journey through life is no more able to disagree with the lived experience of older women (or men) than we are to dismiss their claims of any fixed label thay would like to attach to themselves. And also agree re deep friendships, that are just that. As long as their label is in line with reality, then thats cool. As long as it doesnt impinge on others, thats great.

@justawoman

I’m sorry, I’m really trying but I just don’t get it. Being asexual doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t feel sexual desire. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t want to be in a partnered relationship. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t want to have sex. It doesn’t necessarily mean you have low or absent libido. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t masturbate or take part in other sexual activities. It doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t have sex. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t necessarily enjoy the sex you have .....

How on earth does any of this make you different from the average person who doesn’t call themselves asexual?

Ah but these are not just your average feelings, justawoman, these are genderist feelings...

I do wish people wouldn't make comments questioning whether asexuality is a result of childhood trauma, sexual abuse etc... it feeds the narrative that sexual attraction is 'normal' and not experiencing it must make you broken. This is exactly what people said, and in some circles continue to say, about homosexuality and the justification used by many people for conversion therapy.

'People' didn't say anything like that. One person asked whether there had been any studies into the effect of childhood trauma on sexual desire- bit of a leap from that to justifying gay conversion therapy.

It's not reasonable to assert that never feeling sexual desire is 'normal' and therefore any investigation of possible causes is some sort of prejudice.

One prediction I will make. When the conversion therapy Trojan Horse issue hots up, the asexual identity is going to be useful to the genderists because they'll be able to argue that for asexuals conversion therapy can mean corrective rape. The goal here will be to argue that conversion therapy applies in much the same way to whatever is under the whole queer/trans umbrella.

It's fallicious to say that because we wouldn't say that being homosexual and being heterosexual come from trauma, we could not say the same about someone who considers themselves asexual.

For one thing, we can't even assert that with total confidence about those other categories. No one really knows what influences people's adult sexual identity, as much as some would like to say we do. And it may well not be the same for everyone.

But it is just a serious misunderstanding of how these kinds of categories work or came to exist to assume that a new one, asexual, is equivalent to those others.

These are not ideological or ethical questions about causes, they are materialist and scientific and causative.

The need for / trend towards / desire to commodify or categorise every aspect about one's life is worrisome. If A does not acknowledge their friend B's differences then A may be viewed as [whatever]phobic or intolerant or hateful when A is nothing of the sort but simply does not care about B's sexuality but likes B as a friend.

The need to label a person's lack of libido seems odd but I can't quite figure out why.

Asexual = not sexually attracted to anyone. But you might still actually have sex with someone? Sounds like there’s a conflict of interest.
I spent years having sex with a man because I was too worried about what might happen if I told him I didn’t find him sexually attractive anymore. These days, that would be classed as marital rape.

I worry so much about young girls in particular being coerced into having sex with others by being persuaded that you can be asexual and yet still have sex to please your partner. I’d make my partner his favourite meal even if I didn’t like it, or buy him an album off his favourite band, or buy him tickets for a football game - all things I don’t enjoy. But have sex with him to keep him happy? Nah. That’s all kinds of wrong.
No means no.

I saw this thread and decided to read it to find out more about what asexuality is and I am now far more baffled than before I started.

Loops, I'm working my way through the thread so apples if this has already been answered...

I can't reconcile being asexual with having a high sex drive as you said earlier on. Surely having a high sex drive = desiring lots of sex, the opposite of asexual?

I can understand that for various reasons an ace may have a lot of sex, but surely they wouldn't by definition desire a lot of sex?

It wasn’t until my late 20s that I had the experience of being sexually attracted to a person. I guess I could have described myself as asexual. Prior to that I had relationships, I had sex that I quite enjoyed but it was not the same as feeling real visceral physical attraction.

To be totally honest I think a large part of the change was because I had a period of working away from home. This was pre internet with no TV in my room either so I had a lot of time to masturbate and really tap into my fantasies and what turned me on, and discover my own body. This just seemed to feed into my relationships and I found myself feeling real sexual chemistry with people and developing passionate relationships.

So from my own point of view I’d just say that people can change.

Aren't you describing what in less enlightened times was called being a late developer?

It sounds like labelling yourself as asexual and incorporating that into your identity would have been counterproductive.

I think its confusing when someone says theyre asexual but still like sex etc, or that asexuality is a spectrum

Why is it confusing?
I'm not asexual, it's a term I've only recently become aware of thanks to on here, but it seems to me to be describing someone who has no initial sexual attraction to anyone?
That's different to enjoying sex when you start doing it, surely?

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.

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.

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.

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.