Unlabeled Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Think the problem with asexuality is people still liken asexuality to single-celled organisms, not people. Indeed we're biologically hard-wired to desire sex, or at least that's what most of us were taught in school. So when something clashes against that paradigm it can be a difficult thing to confront and learn about then finally accept. Think what'd help more if a redefining of terms, "celibate by choice" or something along those lines. Poeple know what celibacy means, and if it's explained as 'celibate because I don't see a need to be sexual' people can more easily relate to that than some new use for an old term. Link to post Share on other sites
argar Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Thanks for sharing. I always enjoying something new about asexuality. Link to post Share on other sites
That asexual guy Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Think the problem with asexuality is people still liken asexuality to single-celled organisms, not people. Indeed we're biologically hard-wired to desire sex, or at least that's what most of us were taught in school. So when something clashes against that paradigm it can be a difficult thing to confront and learn about then finally accept. Think what'd help more if a redefining of terms, "celibate by choice" or something along those lines. Poeple know what celibacy means, and if it's explained as 'celibate because I don't see a need to be sexual' people can more easily relate to that than some new use for an old term.It's not a new use for an old term. Asexual has always meant "non-sexual" and has been used as an adjective for things other than reproduction for years. Whereas celibate has the connotation of denying something of yourself. As I don't desire sex I'm actually not denying myself anything. Also, most celibacy is "by choice." Link to post Share on other sites
Batman's Ace Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Indeed, muses Bogaert, everyday sexuality—an occasional “form of madness”—might better qualify as a disorder, given its association “with extreme and risky behaviors along with impaired cognitive function.” Source: http://www.talkpsych.com/talk-psych-blog/2015/7/15/asexualsthe-unnoticed-sexual-minority Okay, so that made me laugh. It makes so much sense! Link to post Share on other sites
Unlabeled Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Think the problem with asexuality is people still liken asexuality to single-celled organisms, not people. Indeed we're biologically hard-wired to desire sex, or at least that's what most of us were taught in school. So when something clashes against that paradigm it can be a difficult thing to confront and learn about then finally accept. Think what'd help more if a redefining of terms, "celibate by choice" or something along those lines. Poeple know what celibacy means, and if it's explained as 'celibate because I don't see a need to be sexual' people can more easily relate to that than some new use for an old term.It's not a new use for an old term. Asexual has always meant "non-sexual" and has been used as an adjective for things other than reproduction for years. Whereas celibate has the connotation of denying something of yourself. As I don't desire sex I'm actually not denying myself anything. Also, most celibacy is "by choice." "Only in the past few years has the public in general accepted homosexuality and bisexuality as genuine sexual orientations (although debates over cause, morality, and status in society continue), but now another orientation is being proposed: asexuality. What is it, and is it really a sexual orientation, determined before birth like heterosexuality or homosexuality are now theorized to be? Traditionally, "asexual" referred to the reproduction of simplistic organisms (amoebas, primitive worms, fungi, etc.) or in humans to a lack of sexual organs or an inability to feel/act sexually due to disability or other condition. However, the new proposed definition for "asexual" presents it as a (human) sexual orientation, following that if heterosexuality is attraction to the opposite sex, homosexuality is attraction to the same sex, bisexuality is attraction to both, asexuality is attraction to neither sex. An exact definition has not been officially set, so most "experts" in the area reference AVEN (Asexuality Visibility and Education Network): "a person who does not experience sexual attraction." This is not to be confused with chastity, which is a choice to not act upon sexual urges (for asexuality to be an orientation it must be innate, not a choice). Even this definition is slightly incomplete; AVEN implicitly indicates asexuality only refers to lack of sexual attraction to another person. (1) The reason I cite a non-academic website (AVEN is actually an online community for asexuals devoted to providing opportunities for these previously isolated individuals to interact and promote awareness about asexuality) and put "experts" in quotes is that the subject of human asexuality has received almost no academic attention, nor in literature, nor by society, and only in the past few months has it become a hot topic in the media. In just the end of March/beginning of April 2006 segments on asexuality were featured on CNN, 20/20, MSNBC, and even Fox News. This recent interest has sparked some notice from researchers, but asexuality isn't as clear-cut as the other three "recognized" orientations."http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1870 As the sexual orientation, 'asexuality' only goes back to 2006 or so. Thus 'new use for an old term.' Link to post Share on other sites
Unlabeled Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Kinda neat by the way how academia referenced this site. You've arrived! :) Link to post Share on other sites
CosineTheCat Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Actually, look historically, people have used the term Asexual even before DJ started AVEN. It was only that AVEN was one of the site that made it popular among people. We have a couple research papers that link all the way back to 1977 using the term asexual in the title of the paper itself. You can argue that Kinsey was the first to do some sort of research about asexuality, although his was mostly relating to homosexuality and heterosexuality, but still linked into Asexuality because of "group X" or the people that didn't fix into either. Although the Term "asexual" itself is becoming mainstream within our culture, it doesn't mean that it wasn't known before. In the beginning of the 1980's the term lesbian and gay were both unheard of but was becoming more mainstream and better known. Gay means Happy before the second half of the century. and it would cause confusion within certain circles of people, and that's all I believe that's happening with Asexuality. It may not be completely mainstream, but it will sooner or later before more known within the world. Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Quickhands Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Gender. “There is evidence that more women than men are asexual.” But among asexuals, more men masturbate, and “asexual men may have elevated paraphilic [atypical] attractions” that accompany their masturbation. Biology and asexuality. Asexual men and women tend to be shorter and more often non-right-handed than average. But there’s no evidence that asexual rodents and humans differ from their sexualized counterparts in levels of circulating testosterone. As a 6'4" right-handed male ace -- wait, really? Huh, well now I feel special. Attention AVEN! I am taking over! Do not panic and do not resist or you will be stepped on! Link to post Share on other sites
fish of hearts Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Asexuality in animals: Like humans, lab rodents vary in sexual interest, from hypersexualized to disinterested. Ditto rams, with 12.5 percent of 584 tested by Charles Roselli and colleagues displaying no attraction either to ewes in estrus or to other rams. I am changin my title specifically in response to this line. Link to post Share on other sites
Unlabeled Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Actually, look historically, people have used the term Asexual even before DJ started AVEN. It was only that AVEN was one of the site that made it popular among people. We have a couple research papers that link all the way back to 1977 using the term asexual in the title of the paper itself. You can argue that Kinsey was the first to do some sort of research about asexuality, although his was mostly relating to homosexuality and heterosexuality, but still linked into Asexuality because of "group X" or the people that didn't fix into either. Although the Term "asexual" itself is becoming mainstream within our culture, it doesn't mean that it wasn't known before. In the beginning of the 1980's the term lesbian and gay were both unheard of but was becoming more mainstream and better known. Gay means Happy before the second half of the century. and it would cause confusion within certain circles of people, and that's all I believe that's happening with Asexuality. It may not be completely mainstream, but it will sooner or later before more known within the world. Well, all the orientations only came about by way of a German in the 1880s convinced he was normal, and anyone whose sexuality didn't comform to his was 'abnormal.' Asexuality has existed for a long time. But as another sexual orientation with a a genetic cause it's very new. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.