In Defense of Sex-Favorable Asexuals

[Kai99]

I forgot to put "some define sexual attraction as" desiring partnered sex. I've seen many different definitions for it, including how AVEN defines it(desiring sexual contact with someone else) http://www.asexuality.org/?q=general.html#ex1.  Pramana, I've had this conversation with you plenty of times. I'm not sure why you seem to have amnesia every time this topic comes up. You should know my position with this by now.

[Pramana]

2 hours ago, Kai99 said:

I forgot to put "some define sexual attraction as" desiring partnered sex. I've seen many different definitions for it, including how AVEN defines it(desiring sexual contact with someone else) http://www.asexuality.org/?q=general.html#ex1.  Pramana, I've had this conversation with you plenty of times. I'm not sure why you seem to have amnesia every time this topic comes up. You should know my position with this by now.

I don't think that AVEN means to say that sexual attraction and sexual desire are the same thing. I think the definition of sexual attraction that AVEN provides on its main page is intended to recognize that sexual attraction is often a cause of sexual desire. But it's obvious that definition is unsatisfactory (as I've said before, producing erotic art is an example of sharing one's sexuality with others). And overall, it sounds more like a definition of sexual desire, and it is contradicted by the far more detailed definition that AVEN provides on its wiki http://wiki.asexuality.org/Sexual_attraction, in addition to having no support in the academic literature. It should be clear to anyone who has done any research on this topic that a definition along the lines of what the AVENwiki provides, or like what @Flygunn provides in this thread, is a far better definition of sexual attraction.

I'm not entirely clear on your position? Is it that you think most heterosexual people are actually bisexual? If so, as far as I can tell that interpretation lacks both popular and academic support. Of course, people are entitled to their personal interpretations. However, if those personal interpretations are factually incorrect according to what almost every psychologist says on the matter, then they should not be used to make overarching claims about the nature of other people's sexualities.

[Kai99]

Quote

I don't think that AVEN means to say that sexual attraction and sexual desire are the same thing. I think the definition of sexual attraction that AVEN provides on its main page is intended to recognize that sexual attraction is often a cause of sexual desire. But it's obvious that definition is unsatisfactory (as I've said before, producing erotic art is an example of sharing one's sexuality with others). And overall, it sounds more like a definition of sexual desire, and it is contradicted by the far more detailed definition that AVEN provides on its wiki http://wiki.asexuality.org/Sexual_attraction, in addition to having no support in the academic literature. It should be clear to anyone who has done any research on this topic that a definition along the lines of what the AVENwiki provides, or like what @Flygunn provides in this thread, is a far better definition of sexual attraction.

Pramana, that definition is what was intended for asexuality all along. No desire for sexual contact with others. Sexual attraction has been defined differently by many different sources. The one that was intended for asexuality was the desire based definition of sexual attraction.

 

Quote

I'm not entirely clear on your position? Is it that you think most heterosexual people are actually bisexual? If so, as far as I can tell that interpretation lacks both popular and academic support. Of course, people are entitled to their person interpretations. However, if those personal interpretations are factually incorrect according to what almost every psychologist says on the matter, then they should not be used to make overarching claims about the nature of other people's sexualities.

Nope. I just... can't. I can't have this exact same discussion with you. If you want to know my opinion on it, just look at the recent discussion we had on this. 

[Pramana]

54 minutes ago, Kai99 said:

Pramana, that definition is what was intended for asexuality all along. No desire for sexual contact with others. Sexual attraction has been defined differently by many different sources. The one that was intended for asexuality was the desire based definition of sexual attraction.

Do you have a source for this claim? If that is the case, then it seems odd that AVEN would have stuck with an attraction-based definition of asexuality for so long, and also that all the early papers published on asexuality use an attraction-based definition.

As I said before, it is always up to individual people to determine their own personal opinions on these matters. But I'm going to follow the published literature on the topic. And I would argue that is the ethically correct approach where the agenda is to provide education about a topic, regardless of whether or not one personally agrees with those views.

[Konfuzd]

@Kai99: Also, let's do away with the idea that sexual orientation and labels are only made with the intention of differentiation in mind. Of course, the distinction plays some part. But many people are happy with labels just for the benefit of self-identification and finally not feeling out of place.

 

I feel as though relating ourselves too much with allosexuals can lead to chaos, but also acting as if we are so widely disparate is also fallacious. 

 

In the grand picture of things, although I can probably relate to many allosexual people on some level, my lack of sexual attraction has defined a lot of my experiences-- mostly described with awkwardness, lack of confidence, and a too-desperate need to fit in-- in a way I could not explain without having discovered asexuality.

[Konfuzd]

Another thing to consider is that your attitude towards identifying as asexual are justifiably elitist and exclusive in the same way that hurts much of the community for other reasons-- as in by allosexuals, or for the idea that the "true" asexual is aro-ace and/or sex-repulsed, etc.

 

Why not just define asexuality as lack of sexual attraction and/or sexual desire?

 

Personally, it can be invalidating that people's only understanding of an asexual person is that they don't want to have sex. It can serve its purpose, but even asexual people who aren't sex-favorable do not necessarily want this to be others' sole implication of their orientation. 

 

I think the common experiences that I first heard coming across this site and discovering my asexuality are very important here: "I knew I was different."/"I thought I was straight because I wasn't gay."/[something about a friend calling somebody "hot" and not completely understanding what that meant.]

 

If we all share these experiences, the aforementioned compromise/definition should suffice. 

[Anthracite_Impreza]

AVEN itself describes sexual attraction as the desire to share sexuality with others, so sorry, AVEN does support the desire definition (albeit in an incredibly hard to find way).

[Kai99]

Quote

Another thing to consider is that your attitude towards identifying as asexual are justifiably elitist and exclusive in the same way that hurts much of the community for other reasons-- as in by allosexuals, or for the idea that the "true" asexual is aro-ace and/or sex-repulsed, etc.

 

Why not just define asexuality as lack of sexual attraction and/or sexual desire?

 Asexuality isn't a label for everyone. There are limitations to asexuality just like any other label. It should not be elitist to question when the boundaries of a label start to become obsolete. If asexuals can desire sex than the whole point of the label goes all out the window. I find it completely unfair to those asexuals who do not desire sex at all to have to question whether the asexuals they might want to date might just come with a "desire for sex." It also does a disservice to asexuality as a whole when people who want sex identify as asexual to the people around them. Many of these sex loving asexuals tell how they confused the hell out of people they know because those people assumed that asexuality meant not wanting sex. I mean look at all the slogans made for asexuality and their focus on not wanting sex. Do we have to change those slogans now so the sex desiring asexuals wont feel out of place?

 

Quote

Personally, it can be invalidating that people's only understanding of an asexual person is that they don't want to have sex. It can serve its purpose, but even asexual people who aren't sex-favorable do not necessarily want this to be others' sole implication of their orientation. 

 

One of the things we want is for people to understand that not everyone wants sex. That would make life easier for asexuals.

 

Quote

I think the common experiences that I first heard coming across this site and discovering my asexuality are very important here: "I knew I was different."/"I thought I was straight because I wasn't gay."/[something about a friend calling somebody "hot" and not completely understanding what that meant.]

 

If we all share these experiences, the aforementioned compromise/definition should suffice. 

AVEN is a perfect place for this. AVEN is not a place just for asexuals, it is for everyone. There are plenty of people still here who use to identify as asexual but don't anymore, but stay because they still have a lot in common with asexuals. 

[Pramana]

1 hour ago, Kai99 said:

 Asexuality isn't a label for everyone. There are limitations to asexuality just like any other label. It should not be elitist to question when the boundaries of a label start to become obsolete. If asexuals can desire sex than the whole point of the label goes all out the window. I find it completely unfair to those asexuals who do not desire sex at all to have to question whether the asexuals they might want to date might just come with a "desire for sex." It also does a disservice to asexuality as a whole when people who want sex identify as asexual to the people around them. Many of these sex loving asexuals tell how they confused the hell out of people they know because those people assumed that asexuality meant not wanting sex. I mean look at all the slogans made for asexuality and their focus on not wanting sex. Do we have to change those slogans now so the sex desiring asexuals wont feel out of place?

I am not a sex-favourable asexual, and yet I have no problem accepting that some people may wish to identify that way. I do not feel that my identity is in any way diminished by their decision to do so.

To answer your last question, yes, I would have no problem changing some slogans if that's what's required to be open and accepting of people. You actually think that preserving slogans is a sufficient basis for excluding people from a community identity?

As far as I can tell, you have not provided any evidence to support the definition you advocate. Personal opinion does not provide sufficient grounds for telling other people how they should understand their own sexualities.

[Kai99]

Quote

To answer your last question, yes, I would have no problem changing some slogans if that's what's required to be open and accepting of people. You actually think that preserving slogans is a sufficient basis for excluding people from a community identity?

Why stop there? Why not just accept everyone and everything as asexual? Your excluding people with your sexual attraction definition Pramana.

 

Quote

As far as I can tell, you have not provided any evidence to support the definition you advocate. Personal opinion does not provide sufficient grounds for telling other people how they should understand their own sexualities.

Pramana, you do not have to agree with me. I don't expect you to. Nor do I expect everyone reading to agree with me. People can identify as whatever they like. My opinion on the matter is my opinion only. 

[Pramana]

42 minutes ago, Kai99 said:

Why stop there? Why not just accept everyone and everything as asexual? Your excluding people with your sexual attraction definition Pramana.

 

Pramana, you do not have to agree with me. I don't expect you to. Nor do I expect everyone reading to agree with me. People can identify as whatever they like. My opinion on the matter is my opinion only. 

The difference is that I'm not excluding people who wish to use the term, and who have a strong claim to do so given what psychology tells us about sexual orientations. Someone who does not experience sexual attraction – regardless of whether or not they experience sexual desire – would not be encompassed by the definitions of any of the other main sexual orientations, since those are all defined in terms of attraction.

I'm making an argument regarding how asexuality should be talked about when attempting to educate people about the phenomenon, in the definitions and language used by asexual organizations, and so forth, and my argument is that published research should be followed when doing so. Personal opinion –unsupported by scientific evidence – is unlikely to be of assistance in this area.

[MrDane]

On 27/5/2017 at 2:41 AM, Konfuzd said:

It has not come to my attention more so that it has been waved in front of my face that next to nobody understands the concept of sex-favorable asexuality, whether they be asexual or allosexual, save sex-favorable asexuals themselves.

 

In an effort to clarify the confusion, I want to ask allosexual people an underlying question for further research:

 

Have you-- as a person who presumably regularly experiences sexual attraction-- ever sought out and/or had sexual pleasure from partnered sex whereas you were not sexually attracted to said partner(s)?

 

I have read about both sexually molested children and adult rape victims, who had a feeling of sexual pleasure through the sex, that were forced upon them. That confirms your question. They migth afterwards still desire sex/be sexual, but may no longer be in peace with feeling the pleasure without a stronger sense of discomfort/anxiety.

 

on a more normal level, the desire to have sex can cloud your sexual mind and make it hard to see the difference, especially if you are drunk, horny and alone and the bar is closing and she is willing and perhaps even have a desire for you. 

[Konfuzd]

@MrDane: That's a rather morbid example, but appreciated. 

 

Also, I would say that from my observation, just because allosexual people aren't sexually attracted to a person, it does not mean that that person is repulsive, or even undeserving of aesthetic recognition. 

 

Obviously, I don't understand sexual attraction very much myself. But it would seem that if a person's objective is only sex with no strings attached, they would preferably have someone they are sexually attracted to, but it's not always the case.

[GLRDT]

On 5/27/2017 at 11:55 PM, Kai99 said:

My problem with sex-favorable asexuals is there isnt really a fixed meaning for what that actually means. Like a lot of the made up terms used on AVEN, what sex-favorable asexuals are tend to differ from person to person. I always thought it meant asexuals who dont mind having sex with their partners. They can find things that they like about sex. They do not desire sex though and would be perfectly okay with never having sex again if their partner suddenly lost their libido.

 

It is a slippery slope though, and for good reason.  Sexuals have sex for a lot of different reasons. For some, it is due to attraction. For others, it is a need for intimacy. If a sex-favorable asexual grow to desire sex just for the intimacy, than they really arent that different from other sexuals. It is toeing the line between sexual and asexual. To me, if a sex-favorable asexual start desiring sex with their partner or other people, they are no longer asexual.

Well said! I feel that I am probably sex indifferent from what I've read but I'm a sex-favorable asexual by your definition. " Asexuals who don't mind having sex with their partners. They can find things that they like about sex. They do not desire sex though and would be perfectly okay with never having sex again if their partner suddenly lost their libido."  I can find things that are pleasant enough about sex, but there are tons of things I'd rather being doing and I never crave or need it, but since I'm dating a sexual person, I urge myself to explore sex with a curiosity and adventure and for learning more about my partner! But yes, I would be fulfilled and content not having sex if I knew my partner would be happy too. Since he is sexual, I don't mind as long as it's not all the time. We are working on finding the perfect balance.