PlanarianFlatworm Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Hey everyone! I'm 18 years old, and have identified myself as asexual for 2 years now. I feel romantic/emotional attraction towards men, and not women. However, I experience sexual attraction towards women, and not men. Because of this disconnect, I feel absolutely no desire to have sex with men or women, or to act out physically in any way. To me, sex without emotion is meaningless, and sex without attraction seems compromising. I also don't view myself as a sexual being, the thought of me acting out sexually seems wrong and out of place. It's just not "me". What are your thoughts? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SuperHorace Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Interesting... sounds asexual to me ^~^ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
That Ginger Kid Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I'm pretty sure the one thing that makes one asexual is not being sexually attracted to anyone. Like, you can be much of anything else, but from what I've seen that's the defining factor. There may be some other classification to umbrella you, but not that I've heard of... :p Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Boo Cat Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I thought I heard that some people who identify as asexual do feel sexual attraction, but not the need to act on it. I could be wrong, though, since I'm fairly new to this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Wreyck Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I choose to define asexuality as little to no sexual attraction and/or little to no desired for partnered sex. So by my definition it would depend on whether you desire sex with women. Do you desire it and just choose not to act on it without the emotional connection? Because then I would view that as mere celibacy and not asexuality. Or do you really not even desire sex with them yet find them sexually appealing? Then maybe I might define your orientation as asexual in my mind. But, really, only your opinion matters in the end. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Starry Night Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I agree. I'm sort of new to this myself, but I think it might depend on what you mean by sexual attraction. If you desire sex, then theoretically you wouldn't be asexual... but if you just find women sexually appealing and don't actually desire sex, then you may be asexual. It all depends on how you feel about it. You would know yourself best, but I wish you the best of luck:) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bronte Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I choose to define asexuality as little to no sexual attraction and/or little to no desired for partnered sex. So by my definition it would depend on whether you desire sex with women. Do you desire it and just choose not to act on it without the emotional connection? Because then I would view that as mere celibacy and not asexuality. Or do you really not even desire sex with them yet find them sexually appealing? Then maybe I might define your orientation as asexual in my mind. But, really, only your opinion matters in the end. Isn't finding someone sexually appealing the same as finding them sexually attractive ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Wreyck Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I choose to define asexuality as little to no sexual attraction and/or little to no desired for partnered sex. So by my definition it would depend on whether you desire sex with women. Do you desire it and just choose not to act on it without the emotional connection? Because then I would view that as mere celibacy and not asexuality. Or do you really not even desire sex with them yet find them sexually appealing? Then maybe I might define your orientation as asexual in my mind. But, really, only your opinion matters in the end. Isn't finding someone sexually appealing the same as finding them sexually attractive ? Yes, but by my definition of asexuality you can find someone sexually appealing as long as you don't actually desire to have sex with them. But can still be aroused by their appearance, see? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bronte Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 To me finding someone sexually appealing/attractive but not having sexual desire is just the same as a sexual person having no libido. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 In my opinion, people can feel sexual attraction and still be asexual, as long as they have no desire to *act on* that sexual attraction with another person . Its different than being celibate because celibacy is CHOOSING to not have sex, or refraining from sex, for whatever reason, as opposed to not wanting or desiring partnered sex at all. If someone just doesn't desire partnered sex then they are not refraining from it. like,if you don't like strawberry ice cream, you won't eat it. you aren't forcing yourself not to eat it, you just don't like strawberry ice cream!. Same with sex.You might feel sexual attraction, but just not have any innate desire for partnered sexual activity. Anyway, AVEN can't agree on exactly what sexual attraction is. In the asexuality guidlines on the main page, it says that sexual attraction IS the desire for partnered sexual activity with another person (which I'm still not entirely sure I agree with?) yet it also infers that being aroused by another person *is* sexual attraction. The guidelines clearly say that being aroused by another person IS desiring partnered sexual activity with them, and that the desire for partnered sexual activity is sexual attraction. However one can be aroused by another person and not want to have sex with them!! someone can be turned on by 10 separate people, and think about each one consecutively when they masturbate,yet if they would never actually seek out any of these people for partnered sex, and would turn it down if offered because partnered sex is something they have no inherent desire for, then of course they are possibly asexual. The desire for partnered sex, and sexual attraction, are two separate things, yet no one can quite agree on which it is that makes someone an asexual. Many people say it's the lack of sexual attraction, obviously, because that's whats written at the top of the AVEN forum page.. yet AVEN specifically says that sexual attraction IS the desire for partnered sex. so is it actually the lack of the desire for partnered sex that makes an asexual? (as opposed to the lack of being aroused by other people) AVEN is strongly in favor of people who ENJOY partnered sex, they say that's fine and you are still asexual no matter how much you love sex and regardless of how much sex you have, as long as you don't have an innate desire for it, but they are very quick to say that oh no, you are not asexual if other people turn you on regardless of whether or not you want to have sex with them. Yet as I said already, they then go and say the desire for partnered sex and being turned on by someone are BOTH sexual attraction, yet they are clearly two different things? *sigh* .. This causes so much confusion and confrontation in the forums, it's a little ridiculous :P my conclusion? Someone is 'sexual' if they feel aroused by a certain person AND would have partnered sex with that person given the opportunity. So, yes, I think you are asexual because you wouldn't have sex with a woman, even if you had the opportunity to do so.. you find them sexually attractive (think they are hot in a sexual way) but would never take it beyond fantasy? correct me if I'm wrong :) what I have taken to doing, to make things simpler by AVEN standards is saying I feel 'sensual attraction' that means all the regular sexual attraction feelings, without the actual desire for *partnered* sex. (edit: that's regardless of the level of one's libido) :) To me finding someone sexually appealing/attractive but not having sexual desire is just the same as a sexual person having no libido.Someone can still be aroused, masturbate etc, and just not desire actual partnered sexual activity. Someone can still have a fully functioning libido and have no desire for partnered sex, regardless of how turned on they are by another person. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Star Bit Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Asexual is starting to have a second definition; people who have sexual attraction but have no desire to have sex. To me this is accurate because there are two components to a sexual or romantic orientation; feeling so and the desire to act. If you don't have both then your not fully it. In the same way an Asexual can still have sex, an Asexual who desires sex because they desire the pleasure from it is still Asexual (think of it like a prostitute). There is also the umbrella term Gray-Ace/Gray-Asexual; which in your case means both your sexual and romantic orientations don't match up and having no desire to have sex despite sexual attraction. (Despite it working its way into the Asexual definition, it's still, by definition; between sexual and Asexual, categorized under gray-A.) But to me the Gray-A term has a majority of "I could have sex with you" definitions to it, so I find it an inaccurate word for people who don't want to have sex. You can identify as something out of convenience; like the asexual who likes sex can identify as __sexual or a bisexual who rarely has the second attraction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I feel the same about the term Gray-A. To me, Gray-A implies that one can desire partnered sex under certain specific circumstances. So, regardless of whether or not one experiences sexual attraction, if they have no innate desire for partnered sex ever, then they are not Gray-A, they are Asexual. (though of course it comes down to whatever an individual prefers to label themselves as) :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 No (innate/intrinsic) desire for partnered sex is the key factor, IMO. So yup, the OP's description sure sounds like asexuality to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sutoriku Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 To be honest, I'd choose the label you feel most comfortable with. You can always change it later, thank goodness for the diversity in the a-sexy spectrum~! ^^ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Prisma Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Interesting. I wouldn't define this as asexuality, but I understand why you do. Your identity is yours to define, anyway- go with whatever definition you're comfortable with :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
eched Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 There are a couple of different things that could be going on here. Asexuals can be aroused. Like, lots of asexual people like kink and porn and stuff like that. But, it can be easy to confuse being aroused for sexual attraction. I know back when I didn't know I was asexual I used my arousal to porn as a way to trick myself into thinking I was straight. I wasn't, I learned. I know a lot of asexual people here tend to say, ya, I can feel sexual attraction, but not sexual desire! So, I'm still ace. Well, this is really just a difference in word choice. I call that arousal and I tend to think of sexual attraction as actually being sexually into someone. Words! I tell ya, they can have so many different meanings for people, it can get pretty confusing. Anyways, trying to put the dictionary aside for a moment, the important question you got to ask is if you are simply aroused by what you are seeing or if it's something more, and to be honest it can be hard to tell. Added onto this there is of course cross-orientation where you can be romantically attracted to one gender but sexually attracted to a different one. That can happen, it's just ignored and not talked about. If you turn out to actually be sexually into women you might actually be a cross. THIS IS NOT A BAD THING! It's fine and if it turns out to be the case you should explore it and be accepting of it. Please don't see it as meaningless. It might very well be an important part of who you are and it should be respected. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ficulnean Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Personally, PanFicto has had me thinking for a while on the issues they bring up, and I'm still thinking. So, what I can say right now is "eh, close enough." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.