LeeBree Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I know even the current definition is debated, but going by it, it defines asexuals as not experiencing sexual attraction… period, end of sentence. From what I understand however, an asexual can fantasize about, masturbate to, or lust over whatever fictional thing or depiction of someone, so long as they feel no sexual attraction to people in real life. Though, the definition here says asexuals have no sexual attraction at all. But this person would be sexually attracted to non-people or fake depictions of people, so they do experience sexual attraction and are still considered asexual. (Unless I'm misunderstanding something here?) So my question is, would the current definition more accurately mean "an asexual person is a person who does not experience sexual attraction for other people in real life?" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shoryu Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I believe it's best to leave the definition as ambiguous possible so that the individual can determine how close or how little that person aligns with the term. As most understand, asexuality is only something you have the final say on, and isn't as easy to identify compared to being merely homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual. The problem with asexuality is that it seems to be much more internal rather than external, so the term really becomes more personal and unique across multiple asexuals that identify as such. Some asexuals like physical intimacy, some detest it, some are okay with sex, some are not, some feel sexual attraction to fictional characters, some do not, some experience attraction only after being seriously invested emotionally into the other person, some do not, etc. I'm inclined to say let the current definition stay the way it is since I believe the less specific it is, the easier it is bring together whom experience similar feelings and discuss. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DivinePrince Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 -points at her signature- If it's people in porn gifs, hentai, whatever- and you disconnect your desire from reality vs fantasy sexual desire. It'd be Autochorissexuality Autochorissexual " A disconnection between oneself and a sexual target/object of arousal; may involve sexual fantasies, or arousal in response to erotica or pornography, but lacking any desire to be a participant in the sexual activities therein. " Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Amy Ghost Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 I believe it's best to leave the definition as ambiguous possible so that the individual can determine how close or how little that person aligns with the term. As most understand, asexuality is only something you have the final say on, and isn't as easy to identify compared to being merely homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual. The problem with asexuality is that it seems to be much more internal rather than external, so the term really becomes more personal and unique across multiple asexuals that identify as such. Some asexuals like physical intimacy, some detest it, some are okay with sex, some are not, some feel sexual attraction to fictional characters, some do not, some experience attraction only after being seriously invested emotionally into the other person, some do not, etc. I'm inclined to say let the current definition stay the way it is since I believe the less specific it is, the easier it is bring together whom experience similar feelings and discuss. I agree with Shoryu. If we make definitions too specific it won't be possible for many people to fit in anywhere. Everyone is different. Everyone experiences things differently. As Shoryu said, some aren't fine with any sexual stuff, some only to a certain extent. Some are okay with sex, some enjoy it. Others rather masturbate. And the spectrum continues further and further. The whole sexuality spectrum is way too wide for definitions to be too specific. I myself don't even really like to talk about sex, other sexual stuff, or sometimes even sensual and alike. I don't fantasize. Not from itself. I have to make myself and I usually can't concentrate and abandon it. If I somehow do I do with my datefriend, who is a sexual, and I imagine situations where she might want something. But I don't really so wish for it.Could say I'm bit of a Prude. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SMW22792 Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 -points at her signature- If it's people in porn gifs, hentai, whatever- and you disconnect your desire from reality vs fantasy sexual desire. It'd be Autochorissexuality Autochorissexual " A disconnection between oneself and a sexual target/object of arousal; may involve sexual fantasies, or arousal in response to erotica or pornography, but lacking any desire to be a participant in the sexual activities therein. " I've never heard of this term before, but I think it may fit me to a point. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ficulnean Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I just have a comment about leaving it open to accept more people. I was not going to stick around here specifically because my loving fanfiction (actually, I don't like pure sex scences, but nonetheless like--sexually--some other scences) and thinking that that was excluded by the definition. Ambigious means that it will mean everything to everyone, not everything to anyone. Any one person will still at face value take it to mean something, which could exclude them just as surely as having a more specific definition could. Not that this argument actually advocates making it more specific or less specific. 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.