Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Asexuals Unite

By Traci Hukill, AlterNet. Posted April 24, 2006.


A small but growing movement believes that asexuality is an orientation as valid as straight or gay.
Advertisement

What do you do if you're a self-proclaimed asexual and you fall in love with another asexual?

You cuddle and kiss and talk a lot. You go to dinner parties, bicker over movies, sleep in the same bed. Maybe you even snuggle up and spoon, the two of you curled up in a cozy double-S.

But it does not occur to you to make the beast with two backs. Your sexual congress is permanently adjourned. You're in love, you're just not making any.

That's more or less the explanation given by Paul Cox, a 21-year-old Long Island University student. While organizing meet ups of New York asexuals last year, Cox met a young woman from the Brooklyn group and started spending a lot of time with her. All his time, actually, and for months, until she pointed out that their friendship had blossomed into a romance. Cox didn't even realize what was happening. "She's the one who dragged it out of me and drilled it into my head," he says, still sounding a little baffled.

Sounds like normal male-female relations. Cox says everything about them is normal. "It's kind of amazing how little of a difference it makes that we're not actually sexually attracted to each other," he says. "The longer we're in this, the more trivial it seems."

The Asexuality Visibility and Education Network couldn't have said it better. In a flurry of media attention that began with the March 24 airing of a segment on "20/20," Cox and other AVEN members have appeared on CNN, Fox News and MSNBC's "The Situation" with Tucker Carlson to make the case that asexuality is as valid, normal and healthy as heterosexuality and homosexuality. They've booked engagements at universities and conferences. The exposure has brought hundreds of new members to the 8,000-strong network.

"Sexuality is like any other activity," says David Jay, AVEN's 23-year-old founder. "There are people for whom skydiving, chocolate cake and soccer are their world. But some people don't like skydiving, chocolate cake or soccer. There's no reason to focus your energy and attention on something you feel no reason to do anything about."

Asexuality is not celibacy, abstinence or escapism, Jay says. "Whatever sexual orientation is, it works like that. It's not something we choose. It's something we intrinsically feel."

But questions remain -- big questions. Mainly: "Are you sure you're not gay?"

An open-ended view of (a)sexuality

Not long ago a gay friend surprised me by declaring his belief that bisexuality doesn't exist. You're straight, gay or lying, he said. It struck me as unnecessarily restrictive. Who's to say there's no gray area between the homo- and heterosexual poles?

But I'm guilty of same. I remember a discussion among friends about a mutual friend, a man, who has never dated anyone as far as any of us knows and who emanates no detectable sexual vibe. Confounded, we ruminated over the possibilities, dragging theories and evidence out for scrutiny. "There's no porn stash," offered one who had stayed at his house. "I think he visits prostitutes," another confided. A third asked the inevitable: "Do you think he's gay and repressed?" We agreed that asexuality was a possibility, at least in theory, but we couldn't decide whether it actually existed.

Underlying that conversation was incredulity that a human being -- especially a man -- could lack a sex drive. In hindsight that seems as narrow as my friend's dismissal of bisexuality. Why shouldn't there be a whole range of intensity of desire, from zero to 10? I know couples in sexless marriages who are utterly devoted to each other, and women who don't care if they never have sex again.

Apparently we are poor judges of each other's sex lives. "There's a wide assumption that everybody's engaging in a lot of sex, and it's just not true," says University of Wisconsin's John DeLamater, editor of the Journal of Sex Research. "Even people who are engaging in sex aren't doing it as frequently as other people think they are."

Asexuality is a poorly understood phenomenon. Two years ago Anthony Bogaert of Canada's Brock University published a study suggesting 1 percent to 2 percent of the population is not interested in having sex. Little other research exists.

There isn't even a real definition. Is it the absence of sexual desire? The lack of desire to have sex with another person? Is it a distinct orientation? Or a matter of intensity? What if you used to like sex and now you don't?

In the absence of consensus, asexual groups have made up their own definitions. The Official Asexuality Society, another online community, states very clearly that its members, referred to as "nonlibidoists," do not experience sexual urges at all. AVEN, on the other hand, has a big-tent philosophy.


Digg!

Traci Hukill is a freelance journalist based in Monterey, Calif.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Room for Change?
Posted by: pixiequix on Apr 24, 2006 1:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's nice to see that this is a topic of discussion. With gay marriage being a current "issue", and therefore never far from the communal spotlight, it seems as though a lot of people have been contemplating how exactly they regard sexual identity. And thank goodness! Because the notion of fitting into only column A or column B is oppressive, boring, and thoroughly unrealistic -- and that amount of choice only exists to those open enough to embrace homosexuality as a choice! Many grow up with the choice of column A or Freak, but in the mainstream we all run into having to choose between A or B or Freak. It's so limiting for such complex beings, and long overdue for some serious changes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Room for Change? Posted by: Xynyx
Nice to see an article about this
Posted by: midge on Apr 24, 2006 2:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only other article I've seen on this subject was one that claimed asexuality did not exist as a person could not be asexual and fully human and that they were just repressed. This upset me a bit, because I knew that there were many other reasons for being asexual that had nothing to do with repression. I know that many people on the autistic spectrum have very acute sensory sensitivities, and that for them, another persons touch can feel like sandpaper rubbing against their skin, so the unpleasantness of sexual contact far exceeds any pleasure they would get from it. Also, some people just have naturally low levels of the hormones involved in sexual attraction, and others have very unpleasant memories or feelings associated with sex that that can never be undone. I'm sure there are many other reasons, simple or complex, and I believe all of them make it a legitimate orientation, so it's nice to see it being discussed. I only had one small problem with the article: but for all the lack of romance this couple shares something most couples don't. Romance doesn't equal sexual activity; sexual activity is just one of many ways to share and express romance. To me, a couple that cuddles, kisses, talks a lot, and snuggles, whether they have sex or not, is pretty darn romantic :-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More Identity Politics?
Posted by: drouse on Apr 24, 2006 4:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm just not sure I'm comfortable with yet another American Identity. We seem fixated on fitting ourselves and other people with tags so we can all know which group everyone belongs to, and heaven forbid someone exist apart from some kind of pseduo- tribalistic identity (i.e. "You're straight, gay or lying").

The funniest example of this was when I found myself chatting online with someone who happened to be gay (self identified as such). We had a polite conversation up until the point I mentioned I was a Mac user, when he started to treat me as some kind of freak. Oh well, I guess everyone needs someone they can call a freak.

I can't offer any evidence in favor of this, but I have a strong feeling that we'd be happier as a people if we could accept more and more people into just the "Human" tribe and be done with it.

Either that or we just need to give up jet planes, highways and high-speed trains and let each other alone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More Identity Politics? Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» RE: More Identity Politics? Posted by: Sunfell
» RE: More Identity Politics? Posted by: drouse
» Harmless? Posted by: nadezhda
» RE: More Identity Politics? Posted by: yesman
» RE: More Identity Politics? Posted by: AVENguy
» RE: More Identity Politics? Posted by: Aussie Kim
Who Knows????
Posted by: MarcGarvey on Apr 24, 2006 5:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American society is so screwed up with sexuality, how can we really know what is what when it comes to drives.

Too many Americans don't tell the truth about sex because they've been convinced it's dirty or irresponsible or something taboo. On this topic, as a society, we are not an authority. So when I see things like this crop up, I don't doubt the validity theoretically, but for it to develop in America....it's going to get perverted because we just cannot handle sexual topics.

Puritanical roots are still being cultivated by the corporations which cultivate any and all things we might feel insecure about. That way they can sell us products to 'help' with our insecurities.

Your breath stink?
You can't last long in bed?
You can't have an orgasm?
Your armpits smell bad?
Your feet smell bad?
You got pimples?

We've got just the thing for you!!! Only $199.99 payable over just 20 installments!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who Knows???? Posted by: shannasmusic
» RE: Who Knows???? Posted by: Stonecutter
Enough Already
Posted by: hagwind on Apr 24, 2006 5:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just what we need, another sexual category! It's so easy to obsess about who is and who isn't, and who isn't what exactly. Think about all the money that's been poured into studies to find out what makes us this, that, or the other way, and then all the hullaballoo that inevitably results as this, that, or the other group try to make political hay from the results. If it's ever proved that our "sexual identity" is 95% caused by some combination of nature and nurture, so what? It's that other 5% -- the choices we make about whatever hand we're dealt -- that makes us human.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: nough Already Posted by: iarkus
Um...
Posted by: Arianna on Apr 24, 2006 5:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I learn that Jay's main mode of transportation around San Francisco is a pair of rollerblades, I think to myself, "This man is gay."

Wow, can't say I've heard that rollerblades are gay now. Is this an American thing or is the author just really full of weird stereotypes?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Um... Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: Um... Posted by: Arianna
» RE: Um... Posted by: dumpsterBaby
Thanks!
Posted by: supercrisp on Apr 24, 2006 6:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since I started taking antidepressants my sex drive has plummeted. Maybe it’s getting older too (almost 40). I’ve always had trouble with physical intimacy because I was beaten a lot when I was a boy. It’s nice to hear that there are other people who find their interest in sex small in comparison to their disinterest. I don’t declare myself asexual; sexual desire is far too confusing to me for me to be able to make such an absolute claim.

On the other hand, I don’t see the harm of “Yet another label” as some of the quietists below do. I’m glad to see this article. I feel less alone now.

And it is lonely to not give a damn (or much of one) about sex. Most of my friends are men, and they talk about bedding women obsessively. It gets a little tiresome, and they boggle when I say I feel there are better things to do than obsess on sex all the time. And I get tired of every woman I talk to thinking I’m after her crown jewels.

Actually I think the idea of sex would be more interesting if there weren’t so much constant tacky chasing after it. It might seem a little more okay and natural, but as things are in our world it almost seems the same to me as going about and buying a HumVee, sort of consumerist and perverse. Sex acts are negotiated through scripted consumerist desire and gender repression to an extent that makes me bilious.

I’m glad to read of other people who, if they aren’t disgusted with sex, at least aren’t interested.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thanks! Posted by: drouse
» RE: Thanks! Posted by: shannasmusic
» RE: Thanks! Posted by: Phenix
asexuality, is there such a thing?
Posted by: suzieoh on Apr 24, 2006 6:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a "club" called the dead vag club . It's my attempt to deal with asexuality--as not disordered. But i'm also not about to go to an asexuality convention, or am i interested in having a relationship without sex, even though i'm not particularly interested in sex.

I grew up a non-sexual Korean. Then I had a lot of sex in my 20's to make up for it. Then I realized I didn't understand it at all. Does that mean I'm asexual? I don't know.

Can you really liken sex to playing football?--i think it's a little more fundamental to us as animals. Which is why people tell me there's something wrong with me because I don't masturbate.

Haven't these people read Freud?

In any case this is an interesting movement, highlighting the fact that not all American's are sleazy idiots--that there is a real need to address sexuality in a non-prurient way--but this may be just another extreme.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank God for Sexual LIberty
Posted by: metamind on Apr 24, 2006 7:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow! I truly enjoyed reading this article, including the comments. I feel like I'm an asexual! I'll refrain from labelling myself because that's part of our predicament. Why should anyone BE anything? The assumption is that consistency is necessary. Why can't you be anything you want? Gay today. Straight tomorrow. Asexual the day after tomorrow.

There is way too much "sexual expectation." Why should we EXPECT ourselves to find a stereotype label that fits us all of the time? Can't we be free to follow our hearts and decide our sexuality moment-by-moment, person-by-person, situation-by-situation? I call this freedom "Sexual Liberty."

Maybe I'm a "Sexual libertarian." Is there such a thing? Oh my God, did I just create another categorical label for human sexuality? Please, people! Give us all a break.

It's love that truly matters. Focus on virtue. Are you respecting the people in your life? Are you being kind and considerate to them? Are you being helpful and serving their true needs? If so, why label yourself? What's the point?
You're already doing the right thing.

Lighten up! Lightheartedness is a virtue!

Blessings!

Steve Moyer
http://stevemoyer.us

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Sexual
Posted by: Roverton on Apr 24, 2006 7:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a Libidonist.

I like to have the endorphic "Inner-Bath" that occurs during orgasm. My partner seems to feel the same way.

Don't use us as the banner for liberality these days though. Today Liberality is a more educated looking lot. Can't be "Literate Person" and a "Sex Machine" all at once.

We'd have to change uniforms. Toss the small, round John Lennon glasses and the scrubbed-clean look.

Sex isn't sensible shoes, though sensible shoes are easily kicked off.

Either way, typing is HOT, isn't it? Ooohhh...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe people found something else
Posted by: Jesse on Apr 24, 2006 7:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This has to rate as the biggest ado about nothing I have ever seen.

So someone isn't interested in sex? So what? I'm not interested in Cricket, learning the oboe or collecting wedgewood tea sets and that doesn't make me Acricketist, or ambioboitic. A-oboe-al? Geez, makes my head spin.

In the spectrum of sexual desire, some people don't care too much for the old in-out. Big deal. To come up with this as either a) pathology or b) some new group identity seems just plain stupid. Does every person on Earth love to eat spicy food? No, but I don't see the ID politics people going after that. But I should wait, maybe they will.

Feh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» shame on you! Posted by: may261989
» RE: shame on you! Posted by: Jesse
Who cares?
Posted by: Guy on Apr 24, 2006 8:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Really. If someone doesn't want to have sex. Fine. Who cares? Why do they have to be "group" or have an identity. I can understand that they might want to share their feelings with like-minded individuals, but so do people who collect baseball cards. Get over it.

This is the kind of inane discussion that gives liberal publications like this a bad name and is fodder the the cons to continue convincing themselves that we are right lot of wankers.

Badger

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who cares? Posted by: chomsky
» RE: Who cares? Posted by: aouie01
This article has helped me understand...
Posted by: Christine on Apr 24, 2006 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My husband and I have been married for 15 years. We even have 3 children. Nevertheless, he has a very low sex drive. 15 years ago, he seemed to enjoy sex a little more; at this point in our marriage, sex is not even a thought.
First, I thought his family and beliefs had a lot to do with his lack of sexual interest. He was raised in a catholic restirictive environment, where sex was "wrong". His father was an alcoholic who mentally abused his children. Then, I thought he was gay, and I actually asked him that question. He has always denied it.
I asked him to seek medical help, but doctors have not been much help. I feel that he has actually accepted that he is just not interested in sex and that is all. The problem is that I am! And I feel very frustrated.
I guess I never thought about people being "asexual". By reading this article, I can see that asexuality may be a serious possibility. I think my husband cares about me, and even though is is not romantic or passionate, he wants a relationship. The problem is that a relationship with out any sex or romanticism can be kind of empty...Can it be that some asexual people may look for sex some times with the only intetion of having children? can it be that some people with little sex drive can become totally uninterested or indifferent? He actually told me that he knew that something was "wrong" with him...is asexuality "normal"? I guess there is a lot of research I have to do...
This article has actually shed a light on this problem. Thank you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Damn Viagra!
Posted by: jrmart66 on Apr 24, 2006 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hooray for Asexuals. Damn Viagra. First only a few men suffer from ED. not the everyday man that the Viagra ads would make you believe is so frustrated and inadequate that he must take their drug in order to "please the wife"> Second: Who says the "wife" wants all that pleasing?

Sex is fine if you like it. But NOT ENJOYING SEX IS NOT ABNORMAL In a vast majority of Marriages, sex is NOT the first thing on their mind. What's for dinner? Where are the kids? did you get that raise? -- Not "bend over slut, and clean off the kitchen table, i want you".

Marriage is hard enough without having to get laid every 20 minutes.

Hooray for the acknowledgement of Asexuality.

NOW, maybe men can actually have female friends!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't believe this!!
Posted by: EasterBunny on Apr 24, 2006 9:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
are there really people who don't like chocolate??

my world has just been turned upside down.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I can't stand it... Posted by: mmeetoilenoir
» RE: I can't stand it... Posted by: BookQ36
Just Great . . .
Posted by: m4d_m477 on Apr 24, 2006 10:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . another thing for facist evangelicals to prop up the non-issues of gay marriage and abstinence education. You can count on this being another thing they will twist to their agenda.

I can see it now - all the right-wing talk Nazis and preachers will now be saying if these people can control themselves, why can't you.

Of course some people can naturally feel no sexual desire. Just beware there will be distortions - lots of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One more thing . . .
Posted by: m4d_m477 on Apr 24, 2006 11:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's wrong to consider asexuality in the same league as being gay, straight or bi.

Asexual people are not discriminated against if they happen to be married. There are married couples who do not have sex - my paternal grandparents did not want to have sex at all with each other; hence, my father was adopted. There was no problem with sexual mechanics - he was a doctor she was a nurse. They felt only the need for companionship and were married for over 50 years.

Also the fact that asexuals do not have sex? The evangelicals anti-sex league would think that's tremendous. It would also give them nothing to bitch or be threatened about

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: One more thing . . . Posted by: Dyrwen
» RE: One more thing . . . Posted by: VisionQuest
Is this what they mean by "Good for nothing"?
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 24, 2006 3:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reminds me of the lady trying to persuade her husband to allow a pet dog to join their household. She assured him that the dog was well behaved: did not bark or growl or dig holes and chew on slippers; did not jump up and lick people’s faces and insist on climbing into their bed. The man thought a bit and replied, “Doesn’t do any of those doggy things? Why that’s almost as good as no dog at all. And that’s what I want: no dog at all.”

Or the classic Pogo strip where, when asked why he was sitting silently under the tree, the character responds, “I’m being as good as good as good can be.” Two bubbleless boxes later, we finally read, “One sure can be good when one don’t do nothing, can’t one?”

So, when one asks an asexual, “Who do you like better? Men or women?” The answer is “Neither?” Or "Both"? Or "It depends"? Or "Who cares"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Much Ado About Nothing
Posted by: GreenLibbie on Apr 24, 2006 5:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is just silly. Some people are very interested in sex, some aren't. What's the big deal? If you're not emotionally invested in it, you can't be manipulated by it--sounds pretty healthy, to me! And I'm so sick of the advertisers and the Christian Right especially telling us ALL ABOUT SEX--what to do, what not to do, how to do it, how not to do it, this group can do it, this group can't, * blah * blah * blah * yada * yada * yada.

Our beloved America is going to hell in a handbasket and this is what is on someone's mind today. Some people have a low or non-existent interest in sex. Fine by me! :-) As long as "whatever" occurs (or doesn't occur) happens between consenting adults, everyone else ought to just mind their own d**n business, that's what I think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Much Ado About Nothing Posted by: Annarisse
G-Gosh, ya' mean George Carlin was wrong?!
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill on Apr 24, 2006 7:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...when he said "the only unnatural sex is not having any"???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Avoiding classifications or at least not being bound by them.
Posted by: aouie01 on Apr 24, 2006 7:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While it is fine to use the term asexual to find like minded individuals, etc., people should not get carried away with defining their lives and preferences based on what identity they believe they belong to.
Resisting classification and being bound by stereotypes is important in other areas too. e.g. It is fine to call yourself a progressive if most of your beliefs are in line with other progressives. But, if you differ on any issue (like say you think abortions should be illegal) then don't be shy to voice it just cause you identify yourself as a progressive. And there is some value to avoiding these generalized terms if you believe (as I do) that they can cause significant harm to things you value.
There was someone (may or may not be me) who resisted describing self based on sexual identity, but instead gave a more descriptive description (which varied based on the person's interest in someone and the context in which the issue arose). Often the person would say ----> "As far as most people are concerned I am principally asexual, but like to think that I can be universally sensuos (if certain conditions are met / exist)." But in a different scenario the person would provide more information such as ----> "I am conditioned to dislike being sexual with the same gender as me." To romantic interests the person would go into more details such as ---> "I would like to have sex / be sexual at least once a week with you."
You may not see the harm being done by identifying your sexual orientation a lot of the time. One form of discrimination that is not uncommon (in progressive circles too) is that a number of female humans who describe themselves as "heterosexuals" openly reject romantic prospects with male humans who have had sex with other male humans.
If you do consider yourself "asexual" then do consider providing a descriptive description such as (unlikely to apply to most / all "asexuals") "I rarely / never / hardly ever feel like having sex, but would like to share other kinds of intimacy with the right person / you / a person of the same gender that appeals to me subconsciously."
Sincerely,
Aouie

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

O.K. , Why Not?
Posted by: NoPCZone on Apr 24, 2006 9:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm 44, single, never married, and heterosexual. The number of people who assume that people like me are gay is incredible. My sexual desire is considerable, but my desire to walk into the minefield of modern relationships is decidedly not. The nonsense that people subject themselves to and put up with looking for Mr/Ms Goodbar is amazing. When something good comes my way-- fine, otherwise I'm not out on the hunt.

It's just at this point in my life it's not the most important thing. Unlike when your twentysomething and single, I don't seek a date just to have something to do on a Saturday Night. Would a steady GF or wife be nice, sure, but I'm not going to let my single status rule every facet of my life.

The number of single adults who have never been married is sharply increasing and has been on the rise for a long time. Maybe we were too busy working, too picky, too busy with our hobbies or whatever. We now find ourselves out of the loop with our peers.

No single guy wants to hang with his married friends and wives without a date and certainly doesn't want to drag a date to the marriage confab. The path of parenting and all it entails has put them on a very different personal path and the time that has passed only makes the difference greater. I can feel for these people. Something is going on out there and maybe it works for some. Why not? Not for me, but it seems O.K.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: O.K. , Why Not? Posted by: Darcy
» RE: O.K. , Why Not? Posted by: Wiggums
» RE: O.K. , Why Not? Posted by: pomes
» RE: O.K. , Why Not? Posted by: Aussie Kim
Legal Ramifications?
Posted by: VOlivieri on Apr 24, 2006 9:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What are the legal ramifications? If a person is married (or civil-unioned) to someone who comes out as an asexual during their marriage/union, is that grounds for divorce?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Legal Ramifications? Posted by: jrmart66
» RE: Legal Ramifications? Posted by: Tom Holum
» RE: Legal Ramifications? Posted by: VisionQuest
» RE: Legal Ramifications? Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: Legal Ramifications? Posted by: YogiBear
natural (non) selection
Posted by: mrsteed on Apr 25, 2006 12:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps this is nature's way of saying "No thanks" to over-population and the stress of modern living.

Also "no thanks" to the obsessive sexualizing of everything by the marketing corporations in order to fascinate consumers.

As for the biological factors--
Studies indicate that modern young males have a much lower sperm count than previous generations. Industrial food producers pump their livestock full of hormones which we ingest. All these assaults on "nature" must take their toll somehow. With one hand (genetically modified or chemically adulterated food) they create a symptom and with the other offer the solution. (RX)

By organic and support life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: natural (non) selection Posted by: Aussie Kim
This is really interesting!
Posted by: philosopherintraining on Apr 25, 2006 2:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've read fiction where there was a strong asexual population, and now it's happening for real. A new sexual revolution?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

who cares
Posted by: thehousedog on Apr 25, 2006 2:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
show me you are a human being by the content of your character and the actions in your life, not the sum of your parts or lack thereof.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: who cares Posted by: Jackieo
who cares
Posted by: thehousedog on Apr 25, 2006 2:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
show me you are a human being by the content of your character and the actions in your life, not the sum of your parts or lack thereof.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I bet your ugly.
Posted by: nergohs on Apr 25, 2006 2:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay....If your on here going....yeah.....that's what I'm saying then I bet your ugly. If your attractive then you don't have this problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I bet your ugly. Posted by: Aussie Kim
» RE: I bet your ugly. Posted by: MJ Fields
who really cares what people want to call themselves
Posted by: may261989 on Apr 25, 2006 8:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Boy, is it anybodys business really what labels people want to attach to themselves.
If you want to call yourself a free thinking restrictive homophobe with clandestine pseudo-erotic tendencies... why not? Its a free world isnt it? ( well that maybe is a stupid question these days.
Wanna call yourself asexual and start a support group ? good luck to ya I say. Really, what business is it of mine

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sorry Posted by: Aussie Kim
Annarisse
Posted by: Annarisse on Apr 26, 2006 6:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a married mother of two who has never felt any real desire for sex. I thought for years that it was something I'd grow out of, that having a baby would make it more comfortable, that I just lacked the right fantasies - something. I love my husband, but I don't feel attracted to anyone. This article has given me a new insight. There are people out there who consider this to be normal, and if they can, why can't I?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

LIARS?
Posted by: insulafortune on Apr 28, 2006 2:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I used the label "asexual" to describe myself in high school to my friends (male and female). I carried it around with a sort of sense of pride.

A better word would have been "liar" as I was busy masterbating everyday usually fantasizing about some of the same friends.
Looking back I really regret this, not only did I miss out on some safer sexual opportunities (a lot of other virgins) I may have missed out on a couple possible serious relationships (gay and straight) and opportunities to grow up.

I was lying to my FRIENDS, not teachers, not parents, not authority, my friends for no reason beyond my insecurity and the desire to be special. While I was confused about my sexuality I had plenty of opportunities to experiment with male and females which went unused.

When I finally came out of two closets at once in my twenties I had sex and realized I was in fact an extremely sexual person.
Things started out awkward and badly at first, but this quickly changed.

But I had a lot of explaining to do and a lot of bad feelings arise for FRIENDS (again) I'd known including some since birth. It definately strained and basically broke some important friendships I had.

I was also straightedge which I think in many ways from experience was a good choice for me. I have nothing against people who use drugs or drink, but both have caused mainly pain and harm in my life while sex has provided the opposite.

Low sex drive is fine, but masterbating and lying isn't - that's just cowardice. If my story isn't yours - good - but if it rings a bell - trust me - and trust others with your body and don't hide. Life is way too short and there is always trouble if you hide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: LIARS? Posted by: josepp
Personal choices...
Posted by: nbrown on Apr 29, 2006 8:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...are personal choices.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Personal choices... Posted by: IndyElliott
Dontcha wish...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Apr 30, 2006 2:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... no one said a single damned word about asexuality... because in the end no one much cared about what kind of sex anyone else was or was not having or was or was not interested in having that they are not involved with.

I would liken it to the concept that without alienation from nature there is no concept of "nature" or "the wild". With no conception of a sexual norm there is no potential for sexual abnormality.

Hmm... I don't think I am expressing this quite right... but I think my general point is clear enough. If anyone can put it a better way, please do so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Asexual because sex is disgusting
Posted by: josepp on Jul 31, 2006 6:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Probability there is more than few options, why someone becomes asexual, the physical one is one does not like sharing sex with the same organs who are used for toilette evacuations is that mix of shit and sex, what takes people to become asexual.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]