Jump to content

Are there not a lot of Ace people?


Aceofheartss

Recommended Posts

You know, I was actually wondering about the "not being able to ever want sex" part. If that was the AVEN definition (asexuals are incapable of ever wanting sex), do you think that there would be a lot of newbies coming in and being confused? Many people say on here that they don't know if they want sex, or that they don't know if they would ever want sex, or something like that. I imagine that if you wanted to be really exact and whatnot you'd say "not ever have the intrinsic need for sex," or something like that?

I think, due to the limitations of human language and our propensity to think we know what words mean without verifying, there will always be some people confused.

That said, I think a desire based definition would cause significantly less confusion than the attraction definition causes. Attractions don't tell us why we are attracted to, but desires do. When I am attracted to a person it is just a feeling of being pulled. I don't know why I feel it, I just do.

But when i desire something it does put an idea into my head of what and why. If I am desiring to eat a piece of cake I know what I desire (cake) and why (hunger). So I feel that makes things less confusing. But like you say, there will still be some people who are unsure.

And if you wanted to minimize the number of false negatives without resorting to a collective identity model the best bet would be to include both attraction and desire. This is what I WANT AVEN to use. Both desire and attraction even though I am an asexual through the lack-of-desire based definition of asexuality.

Well, there are also people who eventually change from asexual to allosexual. What do you personally think in those cases? Do you feel that maybe it's more that they were in the gray area in the first place? Or something like that?

Anyway, I'm not actually challenging what you say and I hope I don't come off as sarcastic or . . . anything else. I'm just interested in hearing your thoughts, that's all. ^_^

I believe sexuality can be fluid. It doesn't happen often, but it can and does change for a small number of people. When it happens, it happens.

The person in your example was asexual at one point, but is not any longer.

The truth of the matter is that, unless your death is seconds away, we cannot ever be 100% certain of our orientation for all times. That is why people say they identify as an orientation. It is assessment of ourselves and our orientation based upon our own personal truth at that moment. No one can be expected to know more than that.

That said, you are coming off very nice and have nothing to worry about. I hope I am not coming off badly. I sometimes come off as a know-it-all or a jerk. That is not my intention.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, I was actually wondering about the "not being able to ever want sex" part. If that was the AVEN definition (asexuals are incapable of ever wanting sex), do you think that there would be a lot of newbies coming in and being confused? Many people say on here that they don't know if they want sex, or that they don't know if they would ever want sex, or something like that. I imagine that if you wanted to be really exact and whatnot you'd say "not ever have the intrinsic need for sex," or something like that?

I think, due to the limitations of human language and our propensity to think we know what words mean without verifying, there will always be some people confused.

That said, I think a desire based definition would cause significantly less confusion than the attraction definition causes. Attractions don't tell us why we are attracted to, but desires do. When I am attracted to a person it is just a feeling of being pulled. I don't know why I feel it, I just do.

But when i desire something it does put an idea into my head of what and why. If I am desiring to eat a piece of cake I know what I desire (cake) and why (hunger). So I feel that makes things less confusing. But like you say, there will still be some people who are unsure.

And if you wanted to minimize the number of false negatives without resorting to a collective identity model the best bet would be to include both attraction and desire. This is what I WANT AVEN to use. Both desire and attraction even though I am an asexual through the lack-of-desire based definition of asexuality.

Well, there are also people who eventually change from asexual to allosexual. What do you personally think in those cases? Do you feel that maybe it's more that they were in the gray area in the first place? Or something like that?

Anyway, I'm not actually challenging what you say and I hope I don't come off as sarcastic or . . . anything else. I'm just interested in hearing your thoughts, that's all. ^_^

I believe sexuality can be fluid. It doesn't happen often, but it can and does change for a small number of people. When it happens, it happens.

The person in your example was asexual at one point, but is not any longer.

The truth of the matter is that, unless your death is seconds away, we cannot ever be 100% certain of our orientation for all times. That is why people say they identify as an orientation. It is assessment of ourselves and our orientation based upon our own personal truth at that moment. No one can be expected to know more than that.

That said, you are coming off very nice and have nothing to worry about. I hope I am not coming off badly. I sometimes come off as a know-it-all or a jerk. That is not my intention.

Nope, you aren't coming off as a jerk or anything! I just wanted to make sure I didn't sound like I was. I often have the same problem, so I'm trying to be better about that. :lol:

I certainly agree that people will always be confused. I don't know if it is possible for us to have a perfect definition, anyway--and by "perfect definition" I mean one that would put to rest any doubt a person might have about whether or not they are asexual. Homosexuality certainly doesn't, for example. I mean, even if a kid knows what homosexuals are and suspects that he might be gay, he is often still questioning his sexuality until he reaches a conclusion. Perhaps a combination of the two definitions that we use here really would create a lot less confusion!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
LauraSusanJohnson8888

I think it's time to do a new study on asexuality. I've been hearing this 1% business since I begin studying myself to see if I fit the criteria back in 2011. When I studied, I found studies dating back to at least 2004 or 2006 when David Jay started this site. I am definitely sure that due to "erasure" and "shaming" issues, a lot of people are not "out." I have been harassed, but not nearly as much as other aces. There are serious people out there harassing a published ace author. This is beyond "trolling". It's gone past criminal the way this person's been describing the harassment. I hope a cyber search is conducted and charges are filed. I'm worried. And they say aces don't need LGBTQIA representation.  I'm starting a new thread if I can with this in case this is outdated here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
The_Reluctant_Dragon

We are very rare. Not much of us out there. I, fortunately, know two other asexual people, but, I can't talk to them since they are popular.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...