Nonlibidoism?

[Zacher]

Some new/old terminology?? Am I out of the loop or did I stumble upon something here??

http://www.theofficialasexualsociety.com/

[liz8008]

Hello Zacher, I went to the web site at the bottom of your message, the Official Asexual Society - looks really interesting, but it won't read right on my computer. Is this your website?

[Kez]

I believe the owner of the website used to belong to this one but due to extremely opposing views between Miss Geri and DJ, she split and made her own site.

[Cate Perfect]

That's right, Cos. She also thought that we'd corrupted the 'true' meaning of 'asexual' and started calling herself a 'nonlibidoist'.

Cate

[Hexpiral]

That, and she still has this nice hobby of using the word 'official' for unofficial purposes.

[Opel the Old]

there are many words one can use, like official, true, pure, blah

by using these time, it seems, only seems the others are unofficial, false and unpure

whatever, find the best match preset orientation for yourself or dont identify yourself with any label, just be yourself

everyone is different, not everyone can fit into preexisting bucket

[winter]

still got the unicorns...

(not that unicorns aren't pretty)

[Penumbra]

... I wonder why Geraldin had to post photos of herself in the nude on a site about nonlibidoism?

[Brian_R]

She seems to love the spotlight, and defining how others should think and feel :?

The way the dispute played out from what I've heard second hand, her 'non-libidoism test', her strong urge to be out there performing and writing, the tone her web page is written in...

I don't think I could stand being around her, ever...

It's nothing I could outright explain, but I get vibes from the web page and writing that make her seem like some sort of missionary of asexuality. Not like the recruitment part, per se, but the way she defines things, and the way she tells you what you AREN'T.

You know, like a missionary might preach the word of God, and tell you that you're a savage heathen so you're going to hell anyway. Not to that extreme, or that offensively, but it really comes out something like that.

The pictures are... annoying. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind pink, purple, and other stereotypically 'feminine' shades, or unicorns, and fairies, and so on... They throw off the whole page though. I'm not seeing the real connection between non-libidoism, even, and them.

Sexuality is just sexuality. Is a violent gun toting maniac innocent and pure because they have no sex drive? I don't think I unicorn is going to want to approach them either, even if mythology only talks about sexual purity.

The page is simultaneously telling you it doesn't matter, and that it's just sexuality, and at the same time, that it's a huge part of who you are and it DOES matter.

Anyway, whatever. How people feel about it is their own business. I just think it seems like it'd be a huge turn-off for some people, possibly even leading to them dismissing that they're asexual because they don't fit the exact image presented in the site. Not all of us are Peter Pans.

If the web page helps you understand yourself though, then the above obviously doesn't apply to you, and I'm happy for you. Seriously, if it brings you as much comfort and joy as this forum does for me, then it's really great. It was never the actual content I was complaining about, it's the way it's presented, and the way it's written.

[Jael L]

I'd like to know more about the disagreements / differing theories that led up to the split. Sorry, just curious. Like others here, I also felt uncomfortable when I was browsing the other site and returned to AVEN with much relief and appreciation for what we have here.

[Verin]

This site still makes me so glad i found Aven first. Aven seems more about supporting people and trying to help them figure themselves out, while that one, well, seems more about trying to make her famous and increase her own ego because she thinks she can tell people what they are and what they aren't. *Thanks Aven for small mercies* :roll:

[Cate Perfect]

I'd like to know more about the disagreements / differing theories that led up to the split. Sorry, just curious. Like others here, I also felt uncomfortable when I was browsing the other site and returned to AVEN with much relief and appreciation for what we have here.

Mostly it was that she felt every asexual was purer (sp?) and more innocent--more like children--and didn't have a sex drive or a sexual thought of any sort. Ever. She wasn't about letting people figure their own lives out--she wanted to tell people who and what they were.

Cate

[AVENguy]

*dusts off the asexual history books*

It's dates back to 2001 and a group called the Haven for the Human Amoeba on yahoo, which was the FIRST first community of asexual people. It only had about 20 members and it was an e-mail list, so you could only have one thread of discussion at a time. There were two people at that point who really wanted to do visibility work- me (through community building) and Geri (through performance art.) AVEN was up at that point, but there was no forum (just the skeletal structure of what's now the info page.) Geri and I tried to partner to do some more web development, but wound up disagreeing over whether asexual people could experience sex drive.

This brought up the larger issue of whether asexuality was an identity that had to be individually adopted and explored or a "state" that could be tested for. We ran off and made our individual little websites (there was a whole webring of Amoeba people, check out the old links section: http://www.asexuality.org/Links.htm)

Eventually I wound up teaming up with pranoidgynandroid, who started the asexuals group on LiveJournal, to redo AVEN, leading to what now could be called "AVEN 1.0" and the forum.

[cait]

wow. Look, you can't just pick up a thesaurus once and come up with a new word, and then repeat it twice in every sentance. That really defeats the purpose of your thesaurus. "nonlibido this, sexuality that" blah blah blah. I am sure they are sick of being discriminated for their nongrammarism as well. I really don't want to read any more of that site. Did you see the "About the Society" section? It is not pretty!

I don't know if this is going to sound offensive or not, but the author of this website comes across as being extremely insecure. You know, when somebody has to repeat something and reassure about something over and over, it's kind of like, 'okay something is going on between the lines here'. I actually feel like it is being rubbed in my face. "I am of this ethnicity and I am of this sexuality" and then it is simply restated over and over and over throughout the site. Like, honestly, get over yourself!!! This site has nothing to do with a community, does it? It's more like a major ego trip.

For me, I think if I had found that website before coming to AVEN, I would have ignored it entirely. I'd still be like, "what the heck is a nonlibidoist?" Or rather, I wouldn't care!

I know I'm sounding pretentious here, but the general feel of AVEN is highly literate, inquisitive, spiritual and accepting. Not to mention it is well put together.

That's ... just one of those very tacky msn groups. I don't even touch those things.

Sorry, I guess I just felt the need to criticize the site since I found so many easy mistakes. I do that with things. I'll shut up now.

[Xenon]

That whole site seems rather narcissistic, somehow...

[M51]

(Swept)

Just found the nonlibido site completely on my own, and it definitely creeped me out, so I did a search and sure enough here is a thread on it.

I see what you all mean. It is creepy. The unicorns and gnomes and mushrooms and faeries...it has the same effect as the bellerina music box playing in the background of a horror flick right before someone gets slashed to death. And why are all the pictures of the "founders" of the site out of focus? And you have to take the "nonlibidoism" test and the email it to her, and she decides if you are a nonlibidoist or not.

But the really creepy part? "Some light relief" which I guess is supposed to be something to take away from the suffocating creepiness of the rest of the site??? - features Drop Dead Fred and Mr. Bean. Creepy, I tell you, creepy.

But I guess it doesn't matter whether or not I think the site is creepy or not, because by her definition I am not a nonlibidoist, so I wouldn't be accepted there anyways. Phew. Thank goodness. That is one group I am more than happy to be excluded from!

[Penumbra]

I did the test to see if I qualify as a nonlibidoist or not, just for a laugh :lol: And I passed! Go me!

I don't have a problem with the terms or definitions, odd as they may be. It's the way they're presented that really bugs me. The language is simplistic and the grammar isn't perfect either, overall the site lacks credibility because it just isn't comprehensive enough. It comes across as a "club", like some people have pointed out, rather than as a source of any real information on asexuality.

I found the questionnaire rather 'amateur' too. Questions like "Do you feel as if you don't fit in with the rest of the world?" and "Can you really relate to your peers?" can hardly determine someone's sexual orientation.

[Ereinion]

The language is simplistic and the grammar isn't perfect either,

That might be because they are dutch!? (Somewhere in my head:"Hasn't she got something to do with England too?" I am not sure)

There really is something about the site that doesn't appeal to me. But I wouldn't fit their definition either.

[Penumbra]

Yes, they are Dutch. That's no real excuse for shoddy grammar/language, though. If they want nonlibidoism to be regarded seriously then they should learn to communicate effectively.

[feef]

I ran across this site long ago when I was on a roll checking out asexuality sites. I giggled a bit because it says it isn't a religion, and then has religious icons and unicorns just sort of randomly thrown up around the place, but then I saw this.

Sex and love are two entirely different emotions. They do not belong together.

1) It's news to me Sex is an emotion.

2) Way to pass judgement on everybody that has ever placed "sex" and "love" in the same basket. Way to be high and mighty about your own sexuality.

[Desert_Rose]

Hi, hello.

That website is rather offensive to me. Dont get me wrong, I fully support asexuality. (Thats why Im at an asexuality website, haha.) But here is my take on it, and I am sexual.

" Sex an love are two entirely different emotions. They do not belong together"

That quote right there set me on edge. Yes they are most certaonly different things, but saying that sounds like your saying "If you really love each other you shouldnt have sex" which is ridicules.

But it was this quote that REALLy got to me:

"Nonlibidoists are born without sexual feelings but they can fall in love, fall in love deeply. A deep, true love untainted by lust."

THAT sounds like they are saying that people who have sexual feelings can never love as deeply!"

I dont think sexual feelings "taint" love. I dont think NOT having sexual feelings taints love either, but who is this person to say that everyone who isnt asexual (or, "nonlibidoist") is doomed to always experiance "tainted" love?

I plan to fall deeply in love one day, marry, and have tons of hawt sex, and my love to the guy in question is not going to be "tainted" because of it.

[Neurovore]

Just because someone is asexual or non-libidoist doesn't mean that they are automatically pure. When I took the "Dante's Inferno" test I got the rating of "Extreme" in three different categories of damnation. If there was a hell I would be in it, yet I really do not have a libido at all.

[Psyche]

Yeah, her approach seems to be rather... evangelical?

She doesn't go to the point of suggesting that all reproduction should be carried out asexually using test tubes and other unpleasantness, but she drops hints of elitism on pretty much every page.

And I find myself thinking, "Oh, GREAT, clearly people aren't xenophobic enough about my 'strangeness' as it is; now she has to encourage them to think that I'm plotting to overthrow the 'tainted' ones with all my rabid fundamentalist asexual brethren." [/facepalm]

I don't think there's anything horribly wrong with sexuality, in large part because I feel I'd have to have some direct experience of it to make that kind of judgement! Yes, I've seen people do horrible things in the name of sex, but *whoops,* organized religion, human government and scientific progress fall into that same category.

And while some people who obsess about sex (certain teenaged males especially) are annoying and/or a bit disgusting, others can be very cute and entertaining about it. I've laughed out loud upon hearing stories of exactly what guys will do to make girls like them.

Dammit, I know that sounds condescending, and it's not *supposed* to. Moving on...

At the same time, I can empathize with her need to assert superiority, because if her life was anything like mine she's spent a lot of time arguing why her lifestyle choice is perfectly valid and "just as good" as the norm.

I'm reminded of people involved in GLBTQ activism who rabidly cite statistics indicating that homosexual couples provide "better homes" than heteros, etc. The practice can result in counterproductive animosity between homonorms and heteronorms, and often involves a distorted view of the facts (often the discrepancies are due to the much stricter requirements on which homosexuals can adopt), but I understand exactly why they do it - because they have dealt/are dealing with many people who feel that homosexuals are inferior parents and spouses.

On an almost-unrelated note, does the term "nonlibidoist" strike anyone else as sounding like a practicioner of an occupation or a religion? Will there be a space on the census form for it, right below Discordian and above Jedi?

[M51]

(Swept)

The American Heritage® Book of English Usage:

-ism

The suffix -ism is a noun suffix. That is, when added to words or word roots, -ism forms nouns. It comes from the Greek noun suffix -ismos and means roughly “the act, state, or theory of.” Nouns that end in -ism often have related verbs that end in -ize (criticism/criticize), related agent nouns that end in -ist (optimism/optimist), and related adjectives that end in -istic (optimistic).

-ist

The suffix -ist, which comes from the Greek suffix -istes, forms agent nouns, that is, nouns that denote someone who does something. Although -ist frequently forms agent nouns from verbs ending in -ize or nouns ending in -ism, it has also come to be combined with words that do not end in -ize or -ism. In fact in some cases -ist can be used much like the suffix -er. In pairs such as conformer/conformist, copier/copyist, and cycler/cyclist, -ist and -er may be used interchangeably.

So I guess technically non-libido-ist is the act, state, or theory of not having libido. But it does come across as an active thing, like something you pursue or choose - exactly like an occupation or religion. Athe-ist, art-ist, rac-ist, geolog-ist, activ-ist....I can't think of a single "natural state" word that ends in -ist. You are blonde or brunette, not blond-ist. You are short or tall, not short-ist. If anyone can think of one please throw it in. And her website sort of implies that her non-libido-ism is in fact equivalent to a political or religious or perhaps a social theory that she develops and pursues.

I dislike that website because it seems to encompass all the worst that Sexuals could perceive us as. Also, her comments about love and sex remind me of something I heard Sinead O'Connor say in an interview - that she could not have sex with someone she loved, because of some sort of sexual trauma she had she associated sex with dirtiness and the absence of love. So nonlibodism's seeming fixation on the purity of platonic love kind of makes me wonder if SHE is a "natural" asexual (not that I want to start a debate on who is a "natural" asexual, but I couldn't think of better word), or if she is suffering from some experience that makes her so hostile towards sex. Which then discredits all asexuals (One of the top ten things people assume about asexuals is that we had a traumatic sexual experience, right?). Because to me hostility towards sex and asexuality are two completely different things - in her words "two entirely different emotions", though of course asexuality is a state of being, not an emotion. Whatever. You get my point, I hope.

But yeah, I think that site does damage to the asexuality visibility and education cause.

[mouth brooder]

Looks to me like nonlibidoism is a business concept. Trademarked like Transcendental Meditation. By the way, that one is a good google for seeing the "seemier" (misspelling intended) side of the self help business.

Any TM'ers here? The spider has spoken.

By the way, bedouia, your horror flick comparison really cracked me up. :lol:

[Maverick Maiden]

If asexuality is non-libidoism, is monosexuality semi-libidoism?

I bet most monosexuals would protest the logic that their libidos are necessarily only half that of bisexuals'.

[Charlieee]

That site is... weird...

I agree, it is sort of like a mission. Kinda scary. I'm grateful too that I found AVEN first XD Seriously, these were my thoughts as I read through the About Asexuality and FAQs:

"Wow, these people are so nice and open! I feel like they could really accept me."

Something like that? And my thoughts on first reading the Nonlibidoism (is that even spelled right?) site:

"....okay...?"

I just did the "are you a nonlibidoist?" test. Let's see what I get... :lol: I hope they enjoy reading my answers... I elaborated a little bit... a couple of nice stories.

[Charlieee]

I'm sorry to ressurect this, since it's a month or so old, but you know how in the previous post I said I took her quiz just for fun? Well, today, almost a month later, I got an answer :shock:

According to her, I'm officially a nonlibidoist

[M51]

Well congratulations!

....I think....

[Charlieee]

I'm sorry, I just never expected a reply...XD

I need a laugh every once in a while ^_^;;