Is Asexuality Genetic?

[Chamomile2]

Is Asexuality genetic? Is it transfered down through genes of our parents?

The reason I mention is I think I have been asexual all my life, I'm 58 now. I didn't have a name for it back then but I don't remember ever having a libido. I have engaged in sexual activity with partners because I felt it was required of me. I've never enjoyed it and mainly been repulsed by even the thought of sex. However, I'm glad I did engage in the act on two occassions as I have a son and daughter and grandchildren that I love so very much.

Back to the main question... I recently discovered my mother and both my sisters are like myself...repulsed by sex. All three abstained from sexual activity after having children except one, she takes part unwillingly occassionaly for her husbands sake only.

Is it genetic? or is it just a coincidence?

[cym]

maybe in some cases. not in mine. my parents are definitely very sexual. ew.

[Éadweard]

I think there are a lot of factors that determine a person's sexual orientation.

[The Great WTF]

There's no evidence that it's genetic. As with any sexual orientation, there seem to be a number of factors that go into determining sexual orientation, though, like homosexuality, it doesn't seem to that dependent on genetics or family history.

[HeidiUK]

maybe in some cases. not in mine. my parents are definitely very sexual. ew.

^^^^This.

That said my mother would try and wash my mouth out with soap if I tried to ask about her sex with my Dad.

I think there are a lot of factors that determine a person's sexual orientation.

Agreed. I do wonder though if there's a correlation between asexuality and disability? In particular autism? I see a lot of autistic-identifying people on AVEN.

[WinterWanderer]

I'm pretty sure all of my immediate family members are either asexual or gray-sexual. That said, most of our other relatives definitely aren't. I think if there is a correlation among families, it's caused more by environmental factors than genetic factors.

[WhoCares2b]

I can assure you that I am the only in my whole family (I have six siblings and so many cousins) to be asexual. If the number of siblings I have is anything to go by, my parents are very sexual too.

So honestly, I don't think asexuality is genetic. :)

[HeidiUK]

What? You don't have 2 sets of triplets in your family? ;)

[Chamomile2]

maybe in some cases. not in mine. my parents are definitely very sexual. ew.

^^^^This.

That said my mother would try and wash my mouth out with soap if I tried to ask about her sex with my Dad.

I think there are a lot of factors that determine a person's sexual orientation.

Agreed. I do wonder though if there's a correlation between asexuality and disability? In particular autism? I see a lot of autistic-identifying people on AVEN.

I have noticed that too about autism.

[CosineTheCat]

There is a strong correlation between people with disabilities being labeled as asexual, even if they're not. As for autism, there are very few studies that have been done on that particular area of research right now; an issue though, is that many people with autism have issues with touch but still experience sexual attraction. Considering, we can't really rank asexuality on a scale of how asexual you are. It becomes a really grey area that's hard to study if people wit autism are asexual or are having other types of aversion.

As for genetics, there has been a study done related to genetic markers of asexuality. The study is called Biological Markers of Asexuality: Handedness, Birth Order, and Finger Length Ratios in Self-identified Asexual Men and Women, if you're interested Yule has uploaded a link on her website to the findings.

[HeidiUK]

There is a strong correlation between people with disabilities being labeled as asexual, even if they're not.

I know. I'm actually, a 'product' of that, in a weird way. I recently joined a disability group aimed at getting the participants and the wider 'normal' public to accept their sexual desires.

It was through this, that I finally said, you know what, it's on a plate in front of me, and I still just do not want it. Thank you.

The organiser (a sex therapist) has apparently never been more shocked.

[chimaera]

.

[Busrider]

Just a thought: there are sex therapists. - They seem to be able to fix or help some folks once in a while, otherwise I wouldn't know why they exist.

Therapy and education in a family are kind of similar. - So what smells "genetic" is likely to be "environmental".

[scarletlatitude]

Genetics is way more complicated than that and at this point we don't really have a way to know if these things are genetic (at least as far as I know).

I'd say sexual orientation is like most everything else biological -- a bit of genetics and a bit of environment. The smallest environmental change can have great impacts on genetics. It's really difficult to tell and I'd expect everyone reaches asexuality in a different way.

[HeidiUK]

The word "innate" gets used a lot on this forum (not this thread, but elswhere), so it makes me wonder what people actually mean by saying that asexuals have no innate desire to have sex (when, based on your posts here, nobody really believes it's genetic...)

Innate = inbuilt though? I believe my asexuality to have been always with me right from when I was a kid, and I don't believe I am genetically asexual. I believe I just am.

Just a thought: there are sex therapists. - They seem to be able to fix or help some folks once in a while, otherwise I wouldn't know why they exist.

Sex therapists can be extremely useful for people with hangups or sexual function issues.

[Snao Cone]

I have to say I'm quite surprised by your responses though. The word "innate" gets used a lot on this forum (not this thread, but elswhere), so it makes me wonder what people actually mean by saying that asexuals have no innate desire to have sex (when, based on your posts here, nobody really believes it's genetic...)

Innate just means it's there, without any experiential cause or trigger. It's not like "You're asexual because you don't have the genes to be sexual" because it's not necessarily inherited from any traceable family tree. The colloquial use of saying something's genetic usually means it comes from parents or grandparents and not much further back. It could, but that's not a universal explanation and it only speaks to the individual's source of asexuality rather than the presence of it in the human population at large.

[Guest]

I think asexuality is genetic, same as homo and bisexuality. I've read one book about noble families in Northern Poland and there were families with many unmarried male members.

[chimaera]

.

 

[Snao Cone]

Innate just means it's there, without any experiential cause or trigger.

I've been studying science (genetics included) too long to agree with you. I don't believe things just simply happen.There is always a cause or a trigger even when we don't realize it.

So do you believe that asexuality comes from trauma or environmental influence, i.e. experiential, rather than something that people are set to be from birth, i.e. innate? There may be a cause for it, but since it's not something we know I think it's useless, if not harmful, to develop speculative personal opinions about the cause of something, especially well before it's understood and accepted in what it means on a day to day basis.

[Starlit Sky]

Asexuality might be genetic. I see a lot of talk about parents and siblings, but y'all forget that genetics are passed down through the generations. ^_^ There are grandparents, great-grandparents, and great-great grandparents to consider. It's impossible to say, "Well, my asexuality isn't genetic and I know for sure, because everybody else is sexual." We don't actually know that everybody else is sexual, at all, it just may appear that way. Not to mention that for many of the previous generations sex just isn't something that's talked about (or at least, very little), which can sometimes make it harder to talk to older members of families about this subject.

That's not me saying that asexuality is genetic, though. I've got no idea if it is or if it isn't, but it might be and it might not be. :)

[NerotheReaper]

I personally don't think it is, but there are a lot of factors that go into someone's sexual orientation. Maybe some cases more than one generation is asexual or siblings are asexual, where I come from you don't talk about it or ask.

[Tanzanite]

To be honest, I'm not sure, but in my case, I doubt it's genetic.

[chimaera]

.

 

 

[Snao Cone]

Well, this is just my theory on asexuality. Please note that I'm not writing this to offend anyone and I'll gladly discuss any of it. The E in AVEN stands for education after all.

There may be a cause for it, but since it's not something we know I think it's useless, if not harmful, to develop speculative personal opinions about the cause of something

Speculations can be harmful, you are right, but I believe that accepting an idea without asking questions and considering the answers you get can be harmful as well. Even more so.

especially well before it's understood and accepted in what it means on a day to day basis

How do you want to make it more understood unless you look at it from all angles and consider alternative explanations?

Considering explanations is fine, as a side note to getting people to accept it as a healthy thing. I often see people talking about causes of homosexuality or transgenderism as ways to avoid how the people with those characteristics are treated. So, social acceptance and tolerance and ensuring equal treatment should be more important than finding root causes, is basically what I'm saying.

And I strongly agree with you on the multiple factors that can play into the same outcome, depending on the person. Some of us could be asexual because of traits inherited from our parents or grandparents. For others it could be part of another condition that has influenced development. Ultimately it does come down to happiness and acceptance, as you said. :)

[Starlit Sky]

Reading through this forum I noticed that there seem to be a lot of people dealing with depression, anxiety, autism, OCD and other mental disorders. (Not everyone, I know). These problems just seem way too frequent for it to be a coincidence.

From my understanding (and I do want to stress that I could easily be wrong here), but many of those things--except Autism--are found in many people who are among the LGBT+, and it's not at all exclusive to asexuality. Even if you don't consider asexuality to be under the LGBT+ spectrum, it's still not "normal" in a sense. Add that to the fact that there's also a large number of members on AVEN who are homoromantic, biromantic, panromantic, trans*, and so on and so forth, and I really do think I've got a point here.

But the thing is: How would you tell the difference between a sexual person who lost/never developed a sex drive due to depression (/trauma/hormonal changes/...) and someone who is depressed and "doesn't experience sexual attraction". Not the easiest thing, right?

Finally, someone else who's bothered by this! To be honest, I'm very against the idea that everyone should be able to use "asexuality" as a label for as long as it fits them. There's a difference between someone who doesn't want to have sex because of trauma, and someone who simply doesn't want to have sex because they don't want to have sex. Asexuality shouldn't be a "temp thing" that anybody can use just because it suits them. To me, that undermines asexuality as a legitimate sexual orientation. Ah, I might get some shit for this. . . .

There are definitely cases where I like to point out that it's okay to call yourself asexual, even if you aren't completely sure. Just for example, I'm pretty darn positive (99.99999%) I'm asexual, but I might be demisexual, or somewhere else in the gray area. However, there's nothing at all that's telling me I'm either of those things just yet, and thus, asexuality fits my sexual orientation perfectly. I believe that I am asexual. In cases where it absolutely-positively looks like someone is asexual, and there's nothing "else" that they think might be blocking the sexual attraction, then I'd probably consider them to be asexual. If the shoe actually fits then feel free to put it on . . . but if the shoe gets worn out, don't be afraid to get another. Basically, is what I'm talking about.

The only difference is that asexuals claim that this is the way they are and that they are happy. But are they really? (It worked for me for years and I was content with the way things were, but then I started feeling like I way lying to myself and realized it wouldn't work for me in the long run). I'm not saying that having sex is the key to happiness, but a working relationship is one of the top priorities for most people and asexuality tends to complicate that in most cases, it seems.

I don't have experience with sexual attraction, but I do with romantic attraction--with being in love, and all that. Not quite the same thing, but I can easily apply it to this situation (and it does help my point that there are many sexuals who, if forced to choose, would say that romantic love is still more important than sex, even though sex is very nearly always a major component of love . . .). I kind of already know now the basis of how I'd feel regarding asexuality if I suddenly experienced sexual attraction like an allosexual. Hmm . . . I've sort of actually said all of this here before, but whatever--I'll just get to the point!

I can't say that I've ever been aromantic, but my romantic orientation is more towards that end than the romantic end ninety-five percent of the time, so I think this still counts. :) Growing up, since I was never able to experience the same lovey-dovey feelings as everyone else, I always felt very secluded. When I discovered asexuality and all the information that AVEN has with it, I also discovered aromantic orientation. In about a year after doing so I accepted that I would never have a crush, would never fall in love, and would never marry--not unless it was some sort of arranged marriage, or something. In other words, I accepted what many aromantics have accepted and are accepting now.

But then, to my surprise . . . I did develop a crush. I did fall in love. It was--and is--an amazing and wonderful experience. I love love and I'm grateful that I've had the opportunity to experience it, and I wouldn't trade a single bit of it for the world. You know how there are so many people who talk about how heartbreak is the most horrible feeling ever, or how terrible crushes are, and so on and so forth? I was always jealous of people who experienced it in the first place, so although I never felt the need to belittle that kind of pain (because it was clear to me that heartbreak is, indeed, very painful) I did always have a bit of an, "At least you can be in love!" sort of attitude. Which, though I regret that kind of attitude to begin with . . . I've discovered that present-Me doesn't disappoint past-Me at all. I've now not only been in love, but also felt the pain of loving someone who doesn't love me back (even though he did love me on some level in the beginning). I know what heartache is. I know what crying at night because you miss when someone would, at the very least, message you is like. But I don't regret it. I don't regret being in love, and I don't regret heartache. They're both amazing, wonderful experiences--if only because I'm grateful I felt them in the first place.

You know what, though? Even with everything that I've felt and experienced and what-have-you regarding love . . . even with everything I just typed in that paragraph above . . . I can confidently say that aromantics really aren't missing anything. They really aren't. Of course, being in love is an amazing experience, and they are missing out on being in love--but lacking the ability to be in love doesn't mean that they aren't happy--or, to borrow your words, it doesn't mean that they're merely functioning as "content." It simply means that they aren't experiencing one single aspect that life has to offer. I said above that I'm grateful that I've experienced love, and I genuinely am. However, both before and after heartbreak hit, I could use all the powers invested in me by good old hindsight and tell you that if I had never fallen in love, I really wouldn't be missing anything (and I specify that so that no one thinks they can say that I'm only saying this because I'm "heartbroken" ;) ). We are all missing wonderful, amazing, liberating aspects of life, no matter who we are; it doesn't all boil down to romantic love.

I'll say it again, just in case anyone needs it: aromantics really aren't missing anything. I promise. :)

And I'm sure you know where all this is going! ^_^ If I can sit here and say, without a shadow of doubt in my heart, that aromantics aren't walking around simply content and just thinking that they're happy because they can't experience romantic love--then it just stands to reason that asexuals aren't "missing anything," either. I'm sure that having that pull to have sex with someone is wonderful and beautiful and amazing and fantastic, and that I would love it and that I would be grateful to experience it--but would I say that I was simply "content" before I experienced that feeling, even with all the powers invested in me by good old hindsight? Judging from my experience with the feeling of being in love . . . I doubt it. :)

[chimaera]

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Caged Bird]

Me and my best friend are asexual and we both have rather sexual parents

[Isak]

As far as I know I'm the only demisexual in the family and among my close relatives (who are all allosexuals). My mum suspects her dad was demisexual though.

I have always been this way. The only thing that has changed is that I stopped trying to fit in (and hurting myself in the process).

What difference does it make whether it is genetic or not?

[Starlit Sky]

What difference does it make whether it is genetic or not?

It makes a difference in the world of science, basically. We are always looking to better understand the world we live in. That's kinda the only reason why somebody would care :lol: Though . . . I'm sure there are other reasons out there.

[champagnerain]

I was going to say that my parents are very sexual...but when I thought about it, it's really just my mom. My mom has also expressed dissatisfaction with her sex life with my dad. She said they don't have sex anymore, and she attributed it to my dad's increased weight/lack of energy/possible depression, but now I wonder if he might possibly be asexual (or gray or something related).

My dad and I have a lot in common when it comes to personality/temperament, and this really got me thinking.

I'm not "out" to my parents because there's really been no need to discuss it. My parents seem to have already accepted that I don't prioritize romantic relationships and they seemed to have come to terms with me being perpetually single. I probably shocked the hell out of them with my current relationship...kinda shocked the hell out of me, too. Anyway, my point is that I doubt I'll ever discuss this with my parents, so I don't think I'll ever know for sure about my dad's feelings toward sex.

I also don't know anything about my other relatives' sex lives (I've never discussed it with them), but a lot of my aunts and uncles are childless, which may or may not be significant.