Rant: Asexuality is a spectrum!!

[momoto]

Does anyone else relate to this? I don't really care for sex that much, but I am not sex-repulsed. Although I can live without it and I don't really need it, I am not opposed to having it and in fact, I'm highly willing to try it out if any partner wants to. I think this is the most difficult thing I try to explain to people since there seems to be this huge misconception that being asexual means you are physically incapable of having sex or enjoying it. 

 

So where I'm going with this is that I am fortunate enough to have a close group of friends who are all open-minded and supportive, so I've never actually had to deal with ace-phobic people or people who make those kinds of remarks that I know others receive. The thing is I just became friends with a girl in my class and we've been hanging out more. She found out I'm ace and she made some comments that made it seem like she didn't seem to completely understand it. I'm always up for trying to explain to people what it means to be asexual and what it is, but she cut me off and snapped, "I know what it means." Anyways, long story short, I told her I'm fine with having sex but I'm just not attracted to anyone that way. Which, okay, I know it is confusing to understanding, but she said, "Are you sure you're asexual?" (not gonna lie, that kinda hurt)

 

But she said some other stuff too about sending me pictures of hot men and seeing which ones I find attractive and finding one I'd like to have sex with. So of course, she missed the point. Ughhh. There was some other stuff there too, and it's just been bothering me a lot. I think because I already had such a difficult time trying to validate my own identity to myself. 

 

I'm so frustrated, I made an entire account for this. 

 

 

[Comrade F&F]

 

Have some cake.

 

There is a comic on asexuality that explains a lot of things pretty well. You could send it to her to clear up the confusion 

[SamwiseLovesLife]

2 hours ago, momoto said:

Does anyone else relate to this? I don't really care for sex that much, but I am not sex-repulsed. Although I can live without it and I don't really need it, I am not opposed to having it and in fact, I'm highly willing to try it out if any partner wants to. I think this is the most difficult thing I try to explain to people since there seems to be this huge misconception that being asexual means you are physically incapable of having sex or enjoying it. 

I don't personally relate to this at all as Sex repulses me but dude I totally agree that that is NOT the definition of Asexual. If you enjoy sex but don't feel sexual attraction you are just as Asexual as I am.

[SamwiseLovesLife]

2 hours ago, momoto said:

'm always up for trying to explain to people what it means to be asexual and what it is, but she cut me off and snapped, "I know what it means." Anyways, long story short, I told her I'm fine with having sex but I'm just not attracted to anyone that way. Which, okay, I know it is confusing to understanding, but she said, "Are you sure you're asexual?" (not gonna lie, that kinda hurt)

 

Rude.

 

Enjoy your cake party without her

[SamwiseLovesLife]

2 hours ago, momoto said:

I'm so frustrated, I made an entire account for this. 

We're glad you've joined us xx

[TinaBlackwood]

Hmm it's really the first time I hear that asexual person can enjoy sex. Can it be considered a dividing line between 2 types of asexuality? I am curious who is in majority...
essays on asexuality.

[Mermaidy]

I don't think the way an asexual "enjoys" sex is the same way a hetero/homo/etc person enjoys sex.  asexuals have no innate desire to have sex with any kind of person, but hetero/homo/etc do.  so it seems like an asexual who "enjoys" sex enjoys it in the same way that a hetero man would enjoy sex with a man if he lives in a world where no women exist or have existed, and the man is also unaware that women are/could be in existence

[a minor triad]

I disagree. It doesn't make sense to say that asexuality is a spectrum. It literally means "the lack of sexual." I don't see how there can be a spectrum of that. I think sexuality is a spectrum on which asexuality is a point (or an extreme). That's not to say I'm trying to invalidate your identity. In fact, I think you're talking about attitudes towards sex, which I can see on a continuous spectrum. It would probably range from repulsion to enjoyment. And from what I understand, asexuals are all over this spectrum.

 

And I agree that there is a big misunderstanding on what asexuality is, for many reasons. The most prominent is that sexuals simply cannot comprehend the lack of innate desire for partnered sexual activity just as asexuals cannot comprehend the presence of that innate desire. 

[Homer]

Firstly, I agree on asexuality NOT being a spectrum. It's the complete absence of something, whether you call that something "sexual attraction" or "innate desire for partnered sexual activity" doesn't make any difference.

 

I believe that one of the biggest misconceptions aces have about sexuals is that they experience sexual attraction (which I consider to be a bs term because nobody seems to be able to explain what that even is) all the time. That would make them raging horndogs and that, in turn, is utter nonsense.

 

I also wouldn't place gray-aces on the ace spectrum because what exactly is "rarely experiencing"? Twice a day? Once a week? Once a month? Every 6th monday in Octember?  I think that someone who sometimes does want sex isn't ace, just as someone who picks salad over a meatball once a week isn't "grey-vegetarian". (This is my personal opinion; I am NOT telling anyone not to identify any way they like, even if I think it's not accurate. No skin off my trunk here).

 

Sexuals are CAPABLE of developing such feelings (wanting to have sex). Aces aren't, ever. Not seeking something doesn't mean you can't still enjoy it once it happens anyway. I can't count the occasions I really didn't want to travel somewhere, but did anyway and ended up enjoying myself there)

[Blondbear]

21 minutes ago, Homer said:

Firstly, I agree on asexuality NOT being a spectrum. It's the complete absence of something, whether you call that something "sexual attraction" or "innate desire for partnered sexual activity" doesn't make any difference.

 

I believe that one of the biggest misconceptions aces have about sexuals is that they experience sexual attraction (which I consider to be a bs term because no ody seems to be able to explain what that even is) all the time. That would make them raging horndogs and that, in turn, is utter nonsense.

 

I also wouldn't place gray-aces on the ace spectrum because what exactly is "rarely experiencing"? Twice a day? Once a week? Once a month? Every 6th monday in Octember?  I think that someone who sometimes does want sex isn't ace, just as someone who picks salad over a meatball once a week isn't "grey-vegetarian". (This is my personal opinion; I am NOT telling anyone not to identify any way they like, even if I think it's not accurate. No skin off my trunk here).

 

Sexuals are CAPABLE of developing such feelings (wanting to have sex). Aces aren't, ever. Not seeking something doesn't mean you can't still enjoy it once it  happens anyway. I can't count the occasions I really didn't want to travel somewhere, but did anyway

and ended up enjoying myself there)

 

Agree.

I said it many times that what people call "demi sexual" or "cupiosexual" is just the avergare sexuality of women. Media made believe to people that women have on average the same sexuality than men which in my opinion and the evidences we have is not true at all. The average woman have a very low number of sexual partners, doesn't experience sexual attraction if not in a relationship, etc...

For me the concept of an asexual wanting sex or enjoying sex for different reasons than sexual attraction is something that doesn't matter that much. 

It's similar to when aromantic people claim to want a marriage and a relationship (not a friendship) , it makes not that much sense to me.

 

[pinten]

I'm concerned about the amount of identity policing occurring in this thread; one thing I most appreciate about our community is the lack of gatekeeping.

 

To the OP: it is commonly accepted that asexuality is a spectrum. This was not the case in the earliest days of the community, but we realized asexuality is just as complex as allosexuality. The AVEN triangle is a great example of our changing understanding. The top line represented the Kinsey scale, and asexuality was literally one point; the symbol was just a purple line connecting the dots. Now, the triangle is shaded with gradients of white, grey, and black to represent the spectrum. 

 

Another thing to keep in mind: sexuality is about ATTRACTION, not ACTION. I never crave eating fried chicken or riding roller coasters, but I enjoy those activities when I do them. If you're not sexually attracted to anyone ever, your're asexual ace, full stop. If you experience some lighter form of attraction and allosexuality doesn't feel right to you, you're on-the-spectrum ace, full stop. For what it's worth, what you described is classic sex-positive asexual, which wouldn't be a spectrum at all as the sex-positive part is action, not attraction.

 

I'm sorry some posters were less than supportive. On the whole, our community is inclusive and welcoming of the spectrum. So have some cake and know you're experience is a valid form of asexuality!

[Kelpie]

5 hours ago, Blondbear said:

I said it many times that what people call "demi sexual" or "cupiosexual" is just the avergare sexuality of women. Media made believe to people that women have on average the same sexuality than men which in my opinion and the evidences we have is not true at all. The average woman have a very low number of sexual partners, doesn't experience sexual attraction if not in a relationship, etc...

This is just... not true.

 

I would also say that asexuality itself isn't a spectrum per se but your relationship with sex definitely is. There are also people who identify as straight who maybe had sex with the same sex before (for example because they were curious about it). What you actually DO doesn't really define your sexuality. 

[a minor triad]

2 hours ago, pinten said:

I'm concerned about the amount of identity policing occurring in this thread; one thing I most appreciate about our community is the lack of gatekeeping.

 

To the OP: it is commonly accepted that asexuality is a spectrum. This was not the case in the earliest days of the community, but we realized asexuality is just as complex as allosexuality. The AVEN triangle is a great example of our changing understanding. The top line represented the Kinsey scale, and asexuality was literally one point; the symbol was just a purple line connecting the dots. Now, the triangle is shaded with gradients of white, grey, and black to represent the spectrum. 

Yes, the triangle represents a spectrum; it is sexuality spectrum, not the asexuality spectrum. If I understand it correctly, the triangle was meant to be a more inclusive adaptation of Kinsey's scale. Whenever I see people talking about being of the "asexual spectrum," they are talking about being somewhere between sexual and asexual, which in my opinion means that they can't be asexual. They might identify as being on the low end of the sexuality spectrum, but that doesn't mean they are asexual.

 

Claiming that there is an asexuality spectrum is like claiming there is a spectrum for introversion and a separate spectrum for extroversion. There aren't. There is just one spectrum (usually called extraversion) and people score across it, either having high or low amounts of extroversion/introversion.

 

And I don't think by claiming "asexuality is not a spectrum" means that we are "identity policing." I'm not threatening/challenging the existence of demisexuals or grey-sexuals, I'm saying that it isn't productive to think of asexuality on a spectrum. 

[Homer]

Again, asexuality is the complete absence of [something]. This has been pointed out in some of the above posts. Making this clear is in no way related to identity gatekeeping, it's just pointing at a textbook definition of a word (or, in this case, a prefix).

 

Pointing something out is in no way intended to exclude anyone from the community. Everyone from all ends and middles of the sexuality spectrum is welcome and accepted, invited and encouraged to share their perspective, their questions and experiences; to learn about themselves and maybe get to know new aspects of life, sexuality and themselves. Yet no level of acceptance and inclusion will change textbook definitions, simple as that.

 

Saying that an apple isn't a cucumber is definitely NOT a case of gatekeeping.

[Kai99]

9 hours ago, a minor triad said:

Yes, the triangle represents a spectrum; it is sexuality spectrum, not the asexuality spectrum. If I understand it correctly, the triangle was meant to be a more inclusive adaptation of Kinsey's scale. Whenever I see people talking about being of the "asexual spectrum," they are talking about being somewhere between sexual and asexual, which in my opinion means that they can't be asexual. They might identify as being on the low end of the sexuality spectrum, but that doesn't mean they are asexual.

 

Claiming that there is an asexuality spectrum is like claiming there is a spectrum for introversion and a separate spectrum for extroversion. There aren't. There is just one spectrum (usually called extraversion) and people score across it, either having high or low amounts of extroversion/introversion.

 

And I don't think by claiming "asexuality is not a spectrum" means that we are "identity policing." I'm not threatening/challenging the existence of demisexuals or grey-sexuals, I'm saying that it isn't productive to think of asexuality on a spectrum. 

Bingo! I see it as "sexuality spectrum" rather than "asexual" spectrum. If viewed on a scale, Asexuality is the end point(people who don't want partnered sex). There are sexualities that may plot closer to the end point(asexuality) but that doesn't mean they are asexual. There is so much diversity in demis/greys/cupios that depending on the person, they could plot closer to the sexual side of the spectrum rather than asexual. For some Demis, experiencing some form of sexual attraction is very rare, so they are asexuals unless they form a strong bond, and even than it isn't guaranteed, than there are Demis who, once made that connection which could take a month or so, they are like any other sexual person. Same for greys/cupios. Some are in the middle or closer to the sexual side so saying that they are part of an asexual spectrum makes no sense. You have to find where the sexual spectrum ends and the asexual one begins for that to be the case.

[cooliocool]

Sexuality is a spectrum 

[Snao Cone]

@momoto, if I interpret your original post correctly, it sounds like you're speaking of the difference between sex-repulsed asexuals and sex-favourable asexuals. Sex-repulsion and sex-favouring are slightly different from the asexual vs. sexual distinction. Sexual people can be very strongly sex-repulsed, for example. Asexual people can be okay with having sex with partners if that's what their partner wants, which is sex-favourable. To phrase the asexual vs sexual distinction in this context: are there any needs being unmet if one were to be in a romantic relationship with absolutely no sex? If one had a choice, would they want to be in a relationship with no sex, or a relationship with sex? The question "Would you have sex with your partner?" isn't a very good one to go by, because there are many things that people would be willing to do to ensure their partners needs are being met that aren't also one of their needs.

 

So, there is diversity within the asexual population that holds different attitudes towards sex and sexual experiences. But when someone says "asexuality is a spectrum" it opens up a can of worms as to whether that means virtually every type of sexuality can be placed on an "asexual spectrum" if you stretch and bend definitions enough. And there are a loooot of worms in there that want to come out and argue about this sort of thing, even if they don't fully grasp the original point.