How does this place view single and celibate women

[IsThereAnEchoInHere]

I was reading the comments on other thread (I have a point, so not a TAAT) about the asexual person.
And I’ve also been lurking on Ovarit (I can’t register there) and they also have, just like comments here about asexuality, very disparaging things to say.

So I was wondering does that extent to women who do not have sex? Maybe ever, even once?
Or is the problem just that you don’t like people calling themselves or being asexuals?

And once I’m here.
There’s been lot of talking about virginity being a social construct and shouldn’t matter, but IRL a self-proclaimed feminist (and happens in other situations too) bullied a person who was a virgin. Why was that seen as an okey thing to do?

I was addressing claims made on this thread that no one cares about people’s sexuality, and another call for sexuality to be kept private. These did not seem
specific to asexuality and neither was my response. Apologies I should have quoted the post I was responding to to make myself clearer.

It’s none of my business if other women are completely celibate or shagging loads of partners of either/both sexes (I just hope it’s all entirely consensual and she is making active and positive choices for her own self).

I don’t think asexuality belongs with LGB though, celibacy has never been outlawed (ie most cultures throughout history have legitimised it via religious practices, eg joining the convent).

The asexuality spectrum. What are the respective ends of that spectrum?

This Place has no view, OP. Its an anonymous Internet forum where anyone can post.

As someone who belongs to a small ethnicity and is Lesbian, I'm used to and expect the majority of people not to be interested in my holidays nor my sexuality and its issues. It's fine! And it's really the same issue
The mainstream majority is white, likes Christmas and is straight.
I think the Asexual posters come from the majority group and suddenly are unequipped to deal with the normal lack of interest in your subgroup. The answer is to find/form your subgroup circle; they are interested.

You are not super-special; nobody cares.

The fact the website is called mumsnet means that a large majority will be mums. Most of us will be mums from having sex multiple times when we were trying to conceive or not. Many of us will be with a partner creating or raising that child at some point. So it’s obvious that most of us have not always been celibate and/or single all our lives. Other than that there’s absolutely nothing that’s definitive. There’s no collective viewpoint.

OP click on all the titles of the talk section - there’s health, education, diy, tv, property, elderly parents, sporners corner, off the top of my head. None of which have any relevance as to whether you have sex or a partner particularly. But usually these conversations are through the lens of being a mum as it’s mumsnet.

Not opposed to asexuals. Opposed to attention seekers and people who vastly overstate how oppressed they are.

Also question marks over people making a big deal of being on the "asexual spectrum", i.e. people who do in fact experience some sexual/romantic attraction but feel it convenient to lump themselves in with true asexuals, usually again for attention or oppression points.

I have been on MN for many years. There has always been open support for asexual women. Many have struggled with this aspect of themselves and felt bad about it, felt lesser. Many have been entirely unaware that there are other women like this. Threads on MN have, over the years, provided support, guidance and acceptance for asexual women.

So I do not recognise what the OP is seeing.

That said, there have also been threads which did not ring true. Where perhaps posters were being encouraged to talk about their sexual experiences...

Well, if someone did want to distract MNers from all the legal judgments being handed down today and keep them busy and away from Twitter, shouting something about asexuals then running away would be a pretty effective way to go.

Everyone's sex life is much less interesting than they think it is.

Hi, and thank you for all the answers. Many of you clearly put a lot of thought into the answers.

I’ll just tag some of the posters, sorry if that is annoying!

@MrsOvertonsWindow
Thank you for the book recommendation, I googled it and got I think a copy of the page and going from that alone, it seemed interesting.

@LonginesPrime
Thank you for this perspective.
I’m new to learning about feminism and that’s why for most part, I’ve been lurking in all kinds of feminist sites and reading what everyone has to say. And I actually at one point had a feeling that the hardest part about feminism is other feminist😀!

Warning! I’ll bore you with personal life story:
I just quickly wanted to say that I don’t consider myself as an asexual, but yeah I don’t personally want sex and few times on different online sites I have asked if it’s possible to still have a loving relationship, I’ll get told I’m asexual, see asexual sites. And I do, and they are pretty much filled with people talking about having,wanting,liking sex. So that is not me, and even there people said that I’m not one, I’m just celibate and was pretty much told to give sex a go.

Anyway, I the whole point of my thread really was more on the is it the asexuality or the label/politics or people refraining from sex.

I’ll go back reading the comments now.

I don’t consider myself as an asexual, but yeah I don’t personally want sex and few times on different online sites I have asked if it’s possible to still have a loving relationship, I’ll get told I’m asexual, see asexual sites

People love to define other people using the new lingo - it's something of a flex, like they're down with the kids (even though it's more like "look what I just learned in a Stonewall workshop at the office today"). It's says far more about them that it does about you.

It also makes them feel better about their own self-defined identities if they can welcome others in and feel like they're discovering all these other people whose descriptions of their experiences of sexuality or gender can be rebranded to validate their own beliefs.

I often get told I'm agender or trans because I don't have an inner sense of gender identity - it really messed with my head at first and I did believe this for a while...until I realised that the people who tried to categorise me (1) had a vested interest in doing so to validate their own belief system and (2) might actually be talking out of their arses and might not know that much about my experience of my own feelings at all.

Virginity isn’t a’social construct’ ( I’m tempted to add FFS) . It’s the physical state of not having had sexual intercourse. It applies to male and female , although the male does not have a ‘proof’ like the hymen.

For years now this is what has been said. Including by feminist.

Mostly, the world isn’t that interested in whether you’re having sex or not.

If only this was true.

And I didn’t know you must reply within seconds.

Virginity itself is not a social construct, it is simply the state of not having had sex. The value certain cultures, religions and societies place on virginity, especially female virginity, is another matter.

Hi OP, I remember your other thread where you were told you were asexual. You don't have to take on a label you don't want.

I think though, people were trying to be helpful, as you were asking about a sex free relationship, and seemed to struggle with the concept that most people enjoy and want a sexual element, so the suggestion was to help you find a like-minded partner.

I have a couple of friends who feel the same way, no interest in sex, but would like a partner. They pretty much think it'll never happen. It must be very difficult xx.

I see it as a misogynistic concept invented to pressurise women and make them feel 'abnormal' if they haven't had sex.

I see it as a misogynistic concept invented to pressurise women and make them feel 'abnormal' if they haven't had sex.

Nowadays in our society, yes. But more often throughout many histories and cultures, a concept used to shame women and girls who've had sex outside of the rules in misogynistic societies.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

Definitely. Whatever you're doing, keep it to yourself as far as I'm concerned. Don't want to see it, don't want to hear about it, don't want to know about it. And I'll extend the same courtesy to you - you won't hear or see anything from me about my personal life.

I had a great uncle that was asexual. He just wasn’t interested in sex or relationships. He travelled the world and had a lovely time. Not saying it shouldn’t be spoken about, but he never mentioned or talked about it and nobody else did either because it just wasn’t even on his radar.

I would imagine there are more people who don’t have sex than those that do. I personally am not interested at all in other peoples sex lives. I honestly have no idea who I know has sex or puts their right shoe on before their left. Your level of sexual activity isn’t anything to do with feminism.

I think the social value judgements around virginity are somewhat more complicated than that, although I don't disagree that that is one aspect in modern Western culture. However I would argue that until very recently, men were shamed far more than girls if they were considered 'late' (by the standards of their peers, or even women considering a prospective partner) than women were, whereas women were shamed more for NOT being virgins - still very much the same in some religions / cultures.

However beyond that, there is the purely biological state of having, or not having had, sex. In certain healthcare settings that is valuable information with no value judgement attached. Some potential gynaecological or genitourinary issues could be ruled in or out based on whether a patient has been sexually active or not. So it is more than just a social construct.

*considered 'late' in becoming sexually active, that should say.

I have a couple of friends who feel the same way, no interest in sex, but would like a partner. They pretty much think it'll never happen. It must be very difficult

I suppose that's the situation (i.e. actually trying to find a partner who has a similar attitude to sex and relationships as you do) when a description like asexual might actually have been helpful as a shortcut to explaining your values without having to go into detail, thereby not having to waste too much time explaining your innermost feelings to someone who simply won't be compatible, relationship-wise.

The problem with the word asexual now, like many words around sex and gender, is that there is no clear consensus as to what it means and it seems to have been subverted by queer theory and co-opted by anyone who fancies it, so it has lost any potential usefulness for the people who just want to find a compatible long-term partner.

Are you really advocating that everyone should closet themselves? Never mention their partner? Never discuss whether they fancy someone? Never mention which singer or actor they find attractive? Never wear a ring lest it invite questions? These are all the things that lesbian and gay people had to do in the very recent past in order to keep their sexuality private. You may do all these things (although if you are heterosexual I bet you don’t) but it’s not reasonable to expect others to.

I do wear a wedding ring but I'm a grown woman, I don't go around talking about fancying people or attractive stars or what goes on in the privacy of my home.

I'm not in any way against people talking about their partners but I don't want very personal intimate details, thanks. From anyone. Ever.

If someone were to announce they were asexual to me, I literally would have no idea why they would tell me that. What interest would they imagine I'd have in that? I don't care.