The Wreyck Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 I don't particularly know how I came to be grey-aromantic bi-sensual asexual, and I honestly don't really care all that much. I just am. I don't think it's necessarily totally in genetics, at all. No one else in my family gene pool is remotely like this. I think a lot of it is environmental. I think I chose to be more heavily interested in women than men, but at the same time I could not have stopped it from happening (I tried). I never would have considered women as a possibility if not for a pansexual girl making an attempt to seduce me and opening me up to the possibilities of that world. If not for that I'm quite certain I never would have looked at women in any way other than a normal friend. Now I am extremely physically drawn to them after that world was opened up to me despite the fact that before the door was open I did not even realized the door existed. But though I say that I kinda chose to go down that path, I really also can't change it. I've tried over and over again to change it on a conscious level, but clearly my subconscious, deeper desires don't want to drop women. I think sexuality can change. I think it's highly environmental but also with some biological guidelines. I think we're given genetic options for what paths we personally may take, and that on some level within our mind (whether consciously or subconsciously) chooses the path it wants, influenced by environmental triggers. I think in general that once we make the big choice that feels most right, we generally can't really turn back from it. You can't force your sexuality to change, yet it does have the option of changing of it's own accord in a way. And I think that at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter how you came to your sexual and romantic orientation. It just is, and why stress yourself out over it? Link to post Share on other sites
Pure Infinity Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 people can change through time Link to post Share on other sites
MossyOwl Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 There is absolutely no way I consciously chose to be asexual. I personally don't know of anyone who would choose to put themselves into a tiny box ripe with the potential of a lifetime of sadness. There's no way someone would do that unless that person was an emotional sadist. We must be born this way. Link to post Share on other sites
I'd rather be in band. Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Well, I tried to change my asexuality for about a year after I realized I was different. It was quite detrimental to my mental health, and it honestly didn't change anything. No matter how hard I struggled to change, my thoughts still ended up the same. Eventually, I discovered that there were others like myself, and I simply learned to accept that it was who I was. I believe that it's not a behavior for me. I dare say that I was born asexual. It's how I've been for my whole life. Perhaps my subconscious will stray from it in the future because of environmental factors or a difference in hormones, but I honestly think that I was born the way that I am. Link to post Share on other sites
Zapstileon Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 I think sexuality is innate, but that 'asexuality' is a human term, whereas (a)sexual orientations are natural things and therefore we might experience a shift in how we feel if we find a term that describes us better. Human terms cannot fully capture (a)sexual orientations, however hard we try, and therefore I believe that someone who identifies as asexual today, might some day find that they might not be asexual because there is another orientation possible that applies to them more. I'm not by that saying that you are able to change who you are. I am simply saying that we cannot possibly capture all orientations because we don't necessarily know other orientations exist. Asexuality in itself is a rather recent term, and while people might have been asexual before, they didn't identify as such because it didn't exist. That's why so many people struggle to figure out their identity. Because what if we haven't got a term for their identity? And so they identify as ace, and then one day, there is a term, and they have an epiphany! Just like a lot of people thought they were *something*-sexual until they found AVEN. (I'm having a hard time putting this into words that make sense. Sorry, please don't hate me for my shitty wording.) Link to post Share on other sites
Coolwhoami Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 How then are sexualities manifested? Where "are" they? What governs them? I do not ask these to be mean, I ask because I think it is important to evaluate this type of thinking. Simply because we have words does not make them have some sort of dictatorial relationship over the universe. Classification of taxonomies by biologists does impart some sort of structure upon the world that did not already exist, nor does classifying in such a way create relationships that did not already exist. That we (quite incorrectly, in my opinion) search for "new" orientations does not make them have any more meaning that just simply being words. Human terms can absolutely capture orientations, because that is where they arise from. To say otherwise leads to what is known as an Augustinian picture of language, and there are quite a few reasons why such a picture doesn't work very well. Link to post Share on other sites
Zapstileon Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 How then are sexualities manifested? Where "are" they? What governs them? I do not ask these to be mean, I ask because I think it is important to evaluate this type of thinking. Simply because we have words does not make them have some sort of dictatorial relationship over the universe. Classification of taxonomies by biologists does impart some sort of structure upon the world that did not already exist, nor does classifying in such a way create relationships that did not already exist. That we (quite incorrectly, in my opinion) search for "new" orientations does not make them have any more meaning that just simply being words. Human terms can absolutely capture orientations, because that is where they arise from. To say otherwise leads to what is known as an Augustinian picture of language, and there are quite a few reasons why such a picture doesn't work very well. I could probably discuss this with you in great lengths - it interests me. But I don't know if I can manage to keep it reasonably short for an open forum. That said, what I said above was mainly speculations. And I might have expressed them in a very poor way. I wouldn't suggest that words dictate the universe. Rather the other way around I'd think. What humans see, discover, feel, hear and so on, we put into words. Words that may change as we discover new things or improve the discovery we already made. I'm not saying we should search for other orientations. I'm simply saying that as we evolve, others might emerge. I think that orientations are natural things. We see homosexuality and asexuality (in fish that lay eggs which are fertilized without the male and female ever touching) in different species. Therefore they cannot change in the individual person, yet not every individual may fit in the boxes we have set out there for them. I think this problem stands clear in gender. We use words for structure. So as we change, we will need different words. We might not have a word for everything simply because words don't dictate the universe. We only have words for things we know exist (we have words for things that probably don't exist too, but that's a different discussion), and everything else isn't known to us and therefore not classified by us. So if there wasn't a term for asexuality, I would still be asexual, but because there were no words to describe it, I might feel like I'm something else. Pack animals need to fit in. So what do you do if you don't? You try to adapt - or you just don't because some prefer to be controversial lone wolves. Link to post Share on other sites
Member74140 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 As I recall scientists have come to the conclusion it's biological after observing humans as well as animals. I think after discovering a sheep can be homosexual, which is not really capable of complex choices, would kinda prove a point. Link to post Share on other sites
Spectre/Ex/Machina Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 I believe that we are born this way. Link to post Share on other sites
sonofzeal Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 As with just about everything to do with human behaviour - genetic predisposition modulated by life events. Nothing about behavior is ever 100% genetic, but nearly everything of note has some degree of genetic input. Why should orientation be any different? Link to post Share on other sites
MadRat Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 I don´t hink we can actively decide to be asexual or sexual but I don´t think it has to be only "born this way" and nothing else. For example, traumatic experiences can influence sexuality. It happened to me. Even if it wasn´ very big change (from gay-A to asexual), it disproves "only born this way" theory. Another thing are ferral kids. If a human baby doesn´t live with another humans, it is not able to develop normal human behaviour, including sexual behaviour, so it has to be both nature and nurture. There is absolutely no way I consciously chose to be asexual. I personally don't know of anyone who would choose to put themselves into a tiny box ripe with the potential of a lifetime of sadness. There's no way someone would do that unless that person was an emotional sadist. We must be born this way. There is absolutely no way I would consciously chose to be sexual. It is much easier to be asexual even with that huge possibility of lifelong loneliness. There are worse things than loneliness, for example to be forced into weird porn sex or to be raped by your own partner because "sex is a duty" and bullshit like this, which is very typical for sex-obssessed society of todays. Link to post Share on other sites
seneca Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Slightly off subject,but I have to post this.Many fundamentalists are always saying that being gay is a choice, blah blah blah. Fine. The perfect response to that? Fine,prove it. Be gay for a month. Link to post Share on other sites
sonofzeal Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Slightly off subject,but I have to post this.Many fundamentalists are always saying that being gay is a choice, blah blah blah. Fine. The perfect response to that? Fine,prove it. Be gay for a month. Being gay IS a choice. For bi/pansexuals. Which encompasses a fair percentage of those people most thoroughly confident that being gay is a choice. After all, if it's a choice for them, it's a choice for everyone... right? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Being gay IS a choice. For bi/pansexuals. Which encompasses a fair percentage of those people most thoroughly confident that being gay is a choice. After all, if it's a choice for them, it's a choice for everyone... right? I wouldn't agree to that. While "living a gay lifestyle" is a choice for bi/pan folks, actually being gay is not. They will still feel the desire for sex with folks who are not of their own sex/gender - if not, they never were bi/pan to start with. And whether or not to live a lifestyle is a choice for everyone - gay folks can certainly choose to stay in the closet and live a life in complete celibacy or in a 'ship with an opposite sex "beard". (It's a choice, I didn't say it was a good or healthy one to make... or one that would ever be neccessary if society were less hung up on heteronormativity. -_-) Link to post Share on other sites
Moon Ace Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Slightly off subject,but I have to post this.Many fundamentalists are always saying that being gay is a choice, blah blah blah. Fine. The perfect response to that? Fine,prove it. Be gay for a month. Being gay IS a choice. For bi/pansexuals. Which encompasses a fair percentage of those people most thoroughly confident that being gay is a choice. After all, if it's a choice for them, it's a choice for everyone... right? hmm.. I strongly disagree... if you were being serious. I cannot honestly make a choice to be gay or sexual, just as little as I can choose to be a pelican. I'm not interested in men and never will be... nor am I sexually interested in either men or women. I do agree that a lot of the time it's a mix of nature and nurture, but I also strongly believe that the percentage/part each of those two play a role is different in most people. For some it will be more down to nature and less to nurture and for others it will be the other way round. I feel there is a logic to that... Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 All I know is that I have four siblings, we were all raised in the same household, but I am most certainly the only ace. I found out a few months ago though from my dad (who has never lived with us, our step-dad was the 'father figure' of the household) that an uncle of mine I have never met, on my real dad's side, is asexual.. so that does make me question whether in my case it was nurture, or just something in my nature, that makes me asexual? I'm not fussed about it either way though, it's just interesting to think about :) Link to post Share on other sites
sonofzeal Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 hmm.. I strongly disagree... if you were being serious. I cannot honestly make a choice to be gay or sexual, just as little as I can choose to be a pelican. I'm not interested in men and never will be... nor am I sexually interested in either men or women. That isn't what I was saying, though. I was specifically talking about bi/pan people, who very easily may perceive themselves as having a choice over whether to pursue same-sex or opposite-sex relationships. Someone who is very straight or very gay is much less likely to perceive that as being a choice at all. I never meant to suggest that anyone actually has choice over their orientation. Just that if you're bi, and you perceive yourself having choice over what relationships to pursue, then it's easy to project that on to those around you and assume (incorrectly) that they have that same sort of choice. Link to post Share on other sites
Moon Ace Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 hmm.. I strongly disagree... if you were being serious. I cannot honestly make a choice to be gay or sexual, just as little as I can choose to be a pelican. I'm not interested in men and never will be... nor am I sexually interested in either men or women.That isn't what I was saying, though. I was specifically talking about bi/pan people, who very easily may perceive themselves as having a choice over whether to pursue same-sex or opposite-sex relationships. Someone who is very straight or very gay is much less likely to perceive that as being a choice at all.I never meant to suggest that anyone actually has choice over their orientation. Just that if you're bi, and you perceive yourself having choice over what relationships to pursue, then it's easy to project that on to those around you and assume (incorrectly) that they have that same sort of choice.Ah I see... That makes more sense to me... Link to post Share on other sites
ItAllMakesSense Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I think aces are born aces. Sexuals are sexual. We're all unique, individual humans. I love the diversity. Link to post Share on other sites
Coolwhoami Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 It is important to distinguish here "born this way" in so far as someone is genetically determined to be of a certain sexuality, from having a set of genetic predispositions that occur in concert with developmental effects (be they physical or experiential in nature) that also can change things in a manner that remains static from then on. It is not necessary for someone to be born of a specific sexuality for it to be a quality that is static. Link to post Share on other sites
R_1 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I think aces are born aces. Sexuals are sexual. We're all unique, individual humans. I love the diversity. If you're speaking in general, you got a point. If you're speaking for every one, there's 0 evidence that suggests we are all born this way seeing as every legit studies do not rule out sexual orientation being altered by hormones/brain changes. There were strokes that altered sexual orientation, and thus, it isn't too far off to suggest the existence of brain changes that leads to similar alterations which are far slower than strokes like scenarios that falls under neuroplasticity or slow structure changes. I am one of those people who had transitional sexual orientation and confusion explanation does not cut it well as I have confirmed I had such feelings. I was heterosexual for 8 years till it died out as a whole, and no indication that it will be back for the rest of my life. Link to post Share on other sites
Noxana Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 This is a naturally tricky question. Look at it this way: Our sexuality is being made according to the potentially random circumstances we face in our lives. But it is up to our conscious will how are we going to reply to those circumstances. No, we genetically are not predefined in terms of our sexuality. But if we believe that we were bound from our first breath to become who we are today -- then certainly yes, we are predefined. Perhaps it's some sort of destiny thing. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.