Jump to content
Lamkirk

Are sexuals and asexuals really compatible?

Recommended Posts

gaogao
38 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

How can 'society' (IE people) be giving the message that not liking sex makes you faulty in some way and that sex is dirty, negative and a way of men using women? They're contradictory. Obviously they can be coming from different sources, but they can't both be the dominant message.

 

I agree the first message isn't helpful, but I really don't see much of the negatives - dirty and just for men. Maybe that's just confirmation bias of sexual male at work though.

The way society looks at sex, especially for women is very contradictory. Women should be sexually available to men, but not too sexually available, or they're sluts and should be shamed, especially for playing right into men's hands.

 

Women should like sex with men because otherwise something is wrong with them (they need to have children! men need sex with women and we should be willing!), but if you like it too much, i.e. enough to pursue it actively yourself, you're unwomanly and have no self-respect.

 

 Being a woman is treading the line between these two things - it DOES sound contradictory, because it is. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

The flipside of that applies too.

 

Men are treading the line between being the strong silent self-reliant protector, and being the sensitive, vulnerable, toilet-cleaning equal partner. Too much one way and we're meatheaded red-pillers, too much the other way and we're whiny cucks.

 

And as for a man who doesn't want sex with women? Either gay or making excuses because they can't get a woman. Or constantly chasing women? Ask Stephen Fallon or Harvey Weinstein how that's working out. Judging by the current shitstorm, I really don't think 'boys will be boys' is the get out it once was - nobody (outside of Twitter trolls) is saying that about the current stories, for instance. There clearly is a wider power imbalance issue, but I don't think the cultural representation issue is simple patriarchal oppression any more. It's complicated for both sides.

 

Also - define 'society'...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao
Just now, Telecaster68 said:

The flipside of that applies too.

 

Men are treading the line between being the strong silent self-reliant protector, and being the sensitive, vulnerable, toilet-cleaning equal partner. Too much one way and we're meatheaded red-pillers, too much the other way and we're whiny cucks.

 

And as for a man who doesn't want sex with women? Either gay or making excuses because they can't get a woman. Or constantly chasing women? Ask Stephen Fallon or Harvey Weinstein how that's working out. Judging by the current shitstorm, I really don't think 'boys will be boys' is the get out it once was - nobody (outside of Twitter trolls) is saying that about the current stories, for instance. There clearly is a wider power imbalance issue, but I don't think the cultural representation issue is simple patriarchal oppression any more. It's complicated for both sides.

 

Also - define 'society'...

I agree that men also have issues, but I wasn't saying that these contradictions don't apply to men. I just don't talk about men because I'm not a man and I can't speak for male experiences.

 

I'm pretty sure you know what I mean by society, though. I'm talking about the messages that we internalise from our experiences and what we see from day to day in interacting with people, the media, and the world around us. Narratives are not all coming from one place, and honestly there isn't really a 'dominant message', just a lot of contradictory ones that we all have to toe the line around and that shape how we see the world.

 

I'm trying to make the case that education is important because otherwise, people will pick out what they feel applies to them the most and what reinforces their worldview, ignoring everything else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao

Also I kind of wanted to add that when I said:

 

"there also needs to be more said about sex as something positive and bonding in relationships rather than something dirty, and especially not as something that's just for men's pleasure or for women to tolerate."

 

I meant this in such a way that I think a lot of asexual women spend their whole lives thinking that all women are just tolerating sex because that's their experience and what they've heard?? They never say that they don't want sex because they don't think any woman wants it, and they can tolerate it and think that's probably how it is for everyone.

 

I spent a long time thinking that I was just normal because I'd heard women supposedly don't want sex as much as men, and that all lesbians have lesbian bed death and stop having sex. This was obviously wrong, I had no idea that sex was a mutual sharing experience and it kept me from realising my sexuality for some time, more than people saying that I was weird for not wanting sex or that something was wrong with me, if that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

 I'm talking about the messages that we internalise from our experiences and what we see from day to day in interacting with people, the media, and the world around us. 

And as you say, they're not homogenous, and everybody tends to take the ones that fit with our existing worldview and reject the others (tons of research on this). We do that with education messages too. That's why I'm very wary of blaming 'society' as some single entity with a coherent voice. 

 

Quote

 I think a lot of asexual women spend their whole lives thinking that all women are just tolerating sex because that's their experience and what they've heard?? They never say that they don't want sex because they don't think any woman wants it, and they can tolerate it and think that's probably how it is for everyone.

I agree, but I've seen that message interpreted as exactly 'you're weird because you don't like sex' and asexuals feeling invalidated, made invisible, etc because of it. Understandably they push back, so you get variations on 'absolutely everything is normal' (which is plainly logically impossible - what they mean is acceptable, but there's so much moral baggage tied up with 'normal' that it's impossible to discuss rationally); or the pushback is that secretly almost nobody likes sex and liking it is actually the 'not normal' thing.

 

So education, yes, but facts only go so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali

Telecaster...everytime women say "oh it's his birthday or Christmas so he'll get something special" or a man says "i'll be lucky ". It may not be interpreted as it sounds to someone sexual, but if you are asexual you really don't know whether it is the truth or not. And it is certainly what asexuals feel about it. The proverbial joke is I now know is a joke not the truth.

 

As far as being told there is something wrong with you...all the advertising using sex to sell, partners and doctors and counsellors.

 

I personally am ok with it all now. I mean being asexual. I still find it hard to believe that my women friends enjoy it. It's a bit like imagining my parents doing it...euugghhhh!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

everytime women say "oh it's his birthday or Christmas so he'll get something special" or a man says "i'll be lucky ". It may not be interpreted as it sounds to someone sexual, but if you are asexual you really don't know whether it is the truth or not. 

Sexuals really don't know if it's a joke or not either. 

 

I don't think advertising is telling you there's something wrong with you, just by using sexual imagery. It's just playing to the fact that most people do think of sex as something pleasurable. I can see how asexuals can interpret their lack of interest as having something wrong with them, and that's unpleasant, but it's not the message that's being transmitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao
48 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

That's why I'm very wary of blaming 'society' as some single entity with a coherent voice. 

Fair enough, i just call these things 'society' because it's easier to say than 'all the different things we hear from all sorts of places about what is normal and what is not'.

 

I think to a certain extent you are right that people are always going to reject things outside of their worldview, but my point is that without any education at all and after hearing so many things about what is normal and what isn't, it's impossible for asexuals to say "WE DON'T WANT SEX" if we are told from various sources that either a) You should want sex and if you don't, something is wrong with you or b) You're totally normal not "asexual" and in fact should not want sex because it's dirty, and no one virtuous actually wants it outside of reproduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InquisitivePhilosopher
1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

...I don't think advertising is telling you there's something wrong with you, just by using sexual imagery. It's just playing to the fact that most people do think of sex as something pleasurable. I can see how asexuals can interpret their lack of interest as having something wrong with them, and that's unpleasant, but it's not the message that's being transmitted.

Asexuals weren't/aren't only talking about seeing advertisements, when they're talking about receiving the message that something was/is wrong with them. They said it was due to their interactions with sex ed teachers who only discussed heterosexual sex, and not any other LGBT+ people or sex, saying things like, "Everyone experiences sexual attraction; it's normal;" the fact that, at the time, homosexuality was condemned as being immoral; and the fact that their peers, family members, and sexual partners would constantly ask them things like, "Who do you like?," "Have you had sex, yet?," "When are you getting married?," "When will you have children?," "What?! You're still a virgin! You'll be an old maid," "Are you gay?," "You don't initiate sex with me. What's wrong?," etc.

 

Hearing everyone around them say these things to them for years, growing up, contributed to the thought that they weren't "normal."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

None of those is actually saying 'not wanting sex is wrong' though - they're just reflecting that most people see sex as an important part of their life. I can completely understand how the effect  of the aggregate of those messages can be the feeling that there's something wrong with you if you don't share them, but none of those examples are saying there's something wrong. Suppressing those messages would mean insisting that everyone ignores something extremely important to 99% of the population for the sake of 1%.

 

The answer isn't to suppress what people can say, it's to understand that just being different isn't being wrong, or broken, or immoral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
21 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

None of those is actually saying 'not wanting sex is wrong' though - they're just reflecting that most people see sex as an important part of their life.

There are PLENTY of people who say that there's something 'wrong' with those who don't want to have sex.  The message is clear, and it comes from our partners, casual dates, friends, relatives, doctors, therapists, psychologists, psychiatrists, journalists, clergy etc.. 

 

Go on some relationship forums and see how many people are complaining about their partners not wanting sex.  Check out the responses. 

 

Quote

Suppressing those messages would mean insisting that everyone ignores something extremely important to 99% of the population for the sake of 1%.

First of all, we really don't know what's important to 99% of the "population".  About 1/4 of the population includes children under the age of 10.  Who's to say what those children are going to think is "important" in 5-10 more years?  Almost 1/10th of the world is starving.  Somehow, I'm not convinced that those people believe that sex is "extremely important" to them

 

We don't really know how "important" sex is to the population on their list of priorities.  For some, sex may be "extremely important".  For others, it might be "somewhat important" or even "not important" at all.  And, people's priorities can change.  For the young newlywed wife, sex might be "very important"...until she has a few children.  Suddenly, her interest in sex may take a nosedive.  And while hormones may play a role in her lack of interest, she may come to realize that sex was more important to her partner than to her, all along.  Yet, her husband's belief is that her interest in sex "should" always be at the higher level it once was.  He's often encouraged to get his wife to a doctor to have her hormone levels checked.  Many times, her hormone levels are normal, yet she still has this "problem".   If she's not interested in sex, she's labeled as "dysfunctional" or as having a "disorder".  The medical profession even has a name for her "disorder", calling it Hypoactive sexual desire disorder.  It's been estimated that this "disorder" affects up to 1/3 of women.  It is also present in men, but I haven't seen any statistics as to how many men are affected. 

 

I also saw  more recent survey that stated that over 35% of the women (surveyed) had no interest in sex, and 15% of the men (surveyed) had no interest in sex.  That means that 50% of the people surveyed had no interest in sex. 

 

Maybe that 99% isn't so accurate after all. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao

I thought the point of this was to say that no one knows what the real percentages are because everyone says different things and skews facts/information to fit their worldviews. :S

 

Yes, some people think sex is important and some people don't... but how do you qualify a person who thinks sex is important vs a person who doesn't? Really, each person's individual perception of whether people think sex is important or not will depend on the people around them specifically, and what they understand to be "normal" and their own experiences.

 

I think what Tele's saying is that being different isn't being wrong, whether that difference is being relatively more interested in sex vs being relatively less interested in it than "everyone else". We shouldn't shut down the conversations about sex being important, because it's undeniable that it is important for many and there is nothing wrong with that - but equally it's also important to say that sex ISNT important for many people (especially self-identified asexuals) and that's okay.

 

It's about coexisting.. right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali
4 minutes ago, gaogao said:

I thought the point of this was to say that no one knows what the real percentages are because everyone says different things and skews facts/information to fit their worldviews. :S

 

Yes, some people think sex is important and some people don't... but how do you qualify a person who thinks sex is important vs a person who doesn't? Really, each person's individual perception of whether people think sex is important or not will depend on the people around them specifically, and what they understand to be "normal" and their own experiences.

 

I think what Tele's saying is that being different isn't being wrong, whether that difference is being relatively more interested in sex vs being relatively less interested in it than "everyone else". We shouldn't shut down the conversations about sex being important, because it's undeniable that it is important for many and there is nothing wrong with that - but equally it's also important to say that sex ISNT important for many people (especially self-identified asexuals) and that's okay.

 

It's about coexisting.. right?

I'm not at all interested in sex...other than philosophically because it is an alien concept...(to me..)...lolol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AthenaFay

compatible

kəmˈpatɪb(ə)l/

adjective

 

1.

(of two things) able to exist or occur together without problems or conflict.

"the careers structure here is not compatible with having a family"

 

I'd say that the sexual differences in and of themselves are a problem and conflict, therefore, you could go as far as to say that the relationship itself is one of conflict, or a conflict. Or else, how is it technically possible to separate or distinguish the fact of asexual-sexual incompatibility from problem or conflict, being as the subject of incompatibility, is by definition, those things? 

 

incompatible

ɪnkəmˈpatɪb(ə)l/

adjective: incompatible

(of two things) so different in nature as to be incapable of coexisting.

"cleverness and femininity were seen as incompatible"

synonyms: irreconcilable, conflicting, opposed, opposite, contradictory, antagonistic, antipathetic;

 

Is it possible for a sexual and an asexual to coexist? Well, I'd say that's possible as a couple (of course, they can coexist together in the context of other relationships! Unless one has a prejudice against the other, of course, and there are no other conflicts), but not without conflict, which is how, inevitably, most mixed sexuality couples must live if they are to continue living together as a couple. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
1 hour ago, vega57 said:

There are PLENTY of people who say that there's something 'wrong' with those who don't want to have sex.  The message is clear, and it comes from our partners, casual dates, friends, relatives, doctors, therapists, psychologists, psychiatrists, journalists, clergy etc.. 

 

Go on some relationship forums and see how many people are complaining about their partners not wanting sex.  Check out the responses. 

 

First of all, we really don't know what's important to 99% of the "population".  About 1/4 of the population includes children under the age of 10.  Who's to say what those children are going to think is "important" in 5-10 more years?  Almost 1/10th of the world is starving.  Somehow, I'm not convinced that those people believe that sex is "extremely important" to them

 

We don't really know how "important" sex is to the population on their list of priorities.  For some, sex may be "extremely important".  For others, it might be "somewhat important" or even "not important" at all.  And, people's priorities can change.  For the young newlywed wife, sex might be "very important"...until she has a few children.  Suddenly, her interest in sex may take a nosedive.  And while hormones may play a role in her lack of interest, she may come to realize that sex was more important to her partner than to her, all along.  Yet, her husband's belief is that her interest in sex "should" always be at the higher level it once was.  He's often encouraged to get his wife to a doctor to have her hormone levels checked.  Many times, her hormone levels are normal, yet she still has this "problem".   If she's not interested in sex, she's labeled as "dysfunctional" or as having a "disorder".  The medical profession even has a name for her "disorder", calling it Hypoactive sexual desire disorder.  It's been estimated that this "disorder" affects up to 1/3 of women.  It is also present in men, but I haven't seen any statistics as to how many men are affected. 

 

I also saw  more recent survey that stated that over 35% of the women (surveyed) had no interest in sex, and 15% of the men (surveyed) had no interest in sex.  That means that 50% of the people surveyed had no interest in sex. 

 

Maybe that 99% isn't so accurate after all. 

 

 

Can we not get derailed on to this yet again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Float On

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
3 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Can we not get derailed on to this yet again? 

Don't know why you're pointing a finger at me when the thread has already been derailed.  Including, by you...

 

I'm just joining in the conversation, whatever it's about at the moment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Whatever. I don't do meta-arguments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
31 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Whatever. I don't do meta-arguments. 

Could-a-fooled-me. 

 

Stop with the "99%" of the population feels a certain way or does a certain thing.  Stick with the TRUTH

 

I've already written that SOME asexuals and sexuals are compatible.  But I wouldn't venture to say that "99% of the population wants sex/thinks it's EXTREMELY important".   

 

It doesn't matter what *YOU* think that "99%" of the population thinks or feels.  What matters is what the truth is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrDane

35% of women answering "no interest in sex"

+

15% of men answering the same

does not equal 50% of the questioned. 

...and I think the number is still much to high. 

 

Most sexuals enjoy sex

 

judging people as a result of your experience with people is quite okay and normal. It is not prejudism, unless you are unable to re-evaluate and change your views. 

 

Most people I meet are sexuals.

 

as most sexuals, I dislike the massive sexualisation of women and total constant focus on being hot/fit/sexy, but at the same time, i see sex as a positive word and it triggers my interest. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
11 minutes ago, MrDane said:

35% of women answering "no interest in sex"

+

15% of men answering the same

does not equal 50% of the questioned. 

...and I think the number is still much to high. 

Oh, trust me.  I don't believe that 50% of ALL people don't have an interest in sex.  That's why I wrote "surveyed".  But until ALL of the 'stats' are in, I think that the numbers are worth looking at more in depth...and not dismissed as some 'quirk'. 

 

Quote

Most sexuals enjoy sex

This is where I get lost.  We spend so much time on AVEN trying to define 'asexuality', that I wonder about how we define "sexuality". 

 

Exactly how do we define "sexuals"?  Are they people who *desire* and have/want to have sex?  Are they people who have sex, even if they don't necessarily *desire* it?  Plenty of people have sex without the actual *desire*.  We just don't know how many.  Behavior doesn't equate to feelings, or even thoughts.  Lots of people take out their trash, even if they don't especially 'like' doing it.  Can't the same thing be said about sex? (slaps forehead...did I just compare sex to trash?????:D)

 

Quote

judging people as a result of your experience with people is quite okay and normal. It is not prejudism, unless you are unable to re-evaluate and change your views. 

At what point do we get to 'settle' on our views AFTER we've already re-evaluated?  It's not as if someone told me something at 10 years old, and I've ALWAYS held on to that 10 year old view.  I've tested....re-evaluated...and finally come to a conclusion that 'works' for my own life.  I ASKED myself, "Do I even LIKE sex?  And if so, WHY?".  I came up with the answers.  But a LOT of people "out there" don't examine their own values, beliefs, etc. in order to find their own 'truth'.  They simply 'go with the flow'.  I think the same way about sex as I do religion.  I tested...tossed...thrown aside...ripped apart...and FINALLY concluded, that for *m life*, my religious beliefs work for me.  I see sex the same way.  Already been there, done that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali

Most people on this site identify as sexual or asexual or sometimes grey. That's why it's here. Who knows exactly what the percentage is. I don't think it really matters. 

 

Having been in relationships with sexuals which have all ultimately failed, I am interested in whether a relationship between someone who desires sex is ultimately compatible with someone who doesn't. 

 

Note I am not seeking a relationship with a sexual or otherwise. As long as I get hugs from my friends and family that is all the physical contact I need!!

 

I am just mildly interested in the question I posed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alibali

I don't think you can argue with self identification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apostle
On 11/2/2017 at 9:42 AM, gaogao said:

It would also help a lot if society didn't constantly tell people who say they don't want sex that there must be something wrong with them or they're just not doing it right and to keep trying...

 

And there also needs to be more said about sex as something positive and bonding in relationships rather than something dirty, and especially not as something that's just for men's pleasure or for women to tolerate. 

 

This is why we need education and visibility and good communication on all sides. To save a lot of people many years of angst.

Yeah, I agree with you on media and education. Especially as many Parliamentarians seem to be abusing their privileged position. A lot worse in other parts of the world though!

I was though speaking from MY experience, as I believe many people on this website do so no offence intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apostle
On 11/1/2017 at 7:43 PM, InquisitivePhilosopher said:

The thing is, it's not only asexual people's fault. When some were honest about their lack of desire for sexual activity and asked doctors or therapists for help, society and the medical field wasn't as advanced, yet, about asexuality being a normal, sexual orientation.

 

Kinsey, a researcher, knew and had a category for asexuals, (just called, "X,") decades ago, but no one in the medical community bothered to research asexuals or anything about asexuality until more recently.

 

From http://wiki.asexuality.org/Kinsey_scale

 

So, when some told doctors about their lack of sexual attraction, those doctors were just as flummoxed and confused as to what the cause of their lack of sexual attraction was and suggested therapy because that was the only solution they could come up: the idea that it might be due to repressed trauma in their past (even though they hadn't experienced any) and that the asexual person just needs to keep trying to become more comfortable with sexual activity.

 

Plus, some asexuals have mentioned that they weren't 100% sure of their feelings on whether they did or didn't want sex, partly due to the fact that they weren't taught about asexuality being okay or normal, growing up. They weren't deliberately trying to deceive their sexual partners; they spent years, decades, feeling bad and confused about their feelings, too, and genuinely thought that because they had a romantic attraction to their sexual partner, that that must mean they're heterosexual (or homosexual, etc.) and just needed to try sex more often, in order to possibly feel sexual attraction like "everyone else" and "cure" themselves, like doctors and therapists at the time thought.

 

Others might've feared being ostracized or abandoned by their friends, partners, and family, if they told them they weren't interested in sex, because at the time, homosexuality wasn't accepted, either.

 

 

 

Not sure about asexuality being at 'fault'. Being born asexual, sexual, gay, transgender etc is nobody's 'fault'. It's how it is. Education on the differences in human behaviour and sexuality need to be increased, mostly in parts of the world where religion curtails this. It will take a long time, believe me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apostle
18 hours ago, vega57 said:

There are PLENTY of people who say that there's something 'wrong' with those who don't want to have sex.  The message is clear, and it comes from our partners, casual dates, friends, relatives, doctors, therapists, psychologists, psychiatrists, journalists, clergy etc.. 

 

Go on some relationship forums and see how many people are complaining about their partners not wanting sex.  Check out the responses. 

 

First of all, we really don't know what's important to 99% of the "population".  About 1/4 of the population includes children under the age of 10.  Who's to say what those children are going to think is "important" in 5-10 more years?  Almost 1/10th of the world is starving.  Somehow, I'm not convinced that those people believe that sex is "extremely important" to them

 

We don't really know how "important" sex is to the population on their list of priorities.  For some, sex may be "extremely important".  For others, it might be "somewhat important" or even "not important" at all.  And, people's priorities can change.  For the young newlywed wife, sex might be "very important"...until she has a few children.  Suddenly, her interest in sex may take a nosedive.  And while hormones may play a role in her lack of interest, she may come to realize that sex was more important to her partner than to her, all along.  Yet, her husband's belief is that her interest in sex "should" always be at the higher level it once was.  He's often encouraged to get his wife to a doctor to have her hormone levels checked.  Many times, her hormone levels are normal, yet she still has this "problem".   If she's not interested in sex, she's labeled as "dysfunctional" or as having a "disorder".  The medical profession even has a name for her "disorder", calling it Hypoactive sexual desire disorder.  It's been estimated that this "disorder" affects up to 1/3 of women.  It is also present in men, but I haven't seen any statistics as to how many men are affected. 

 

I also saw  more recent survey that stated that over 35% of the women (surveyed) had no interest in sex, and 15% of the men (surveyed) had no interest in sex.  That means that 50% of the people surveyed had no interest in sex. 

 

Maybe that 99% isn't so accurate after all. 

 

 

Hmm? Over 25 years ago I felt that the sexual relationship I had with my wife was not what I was hoping for. She would oblige me but I sensed that she was just going along with it. So I stopped. No response. No debate although I tried.

So I'm sexual but now celibate. Where do I fit in the consensus?

I suspect there are millions of sexuals like me who are in the same position. That means, as Vega57 states, that the polls are vastly inaccurate and don't give a true picture of society as it stands (presumably Western society). Go to India or Africa and a whole new scenario is revealed.

 

Regarding the figures, what age group were surveyed? It's common knowledge that a majority of females over a certain age are not interested in any sexual activity so these surveys could be biased without knowing the full picture. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao
42 minutes ago, Apostle said:

I was though speaking from MY experience, as I believe many people on this website do so no offence intended.

I also speak from my experience...

 

I thought it would be relevant to point out some of the things asexuals are faced with when saying we don't want sex. I'm sure it would have made your life easier if we were able to come out more freely (it would make our lives easier too) but I think my explanation shows some of the reasons why so many people don't realise they might be asexual or might be uncomfortable with admitting that they do not want sex and therefore can't easily come out.

 

No offense intended either, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
1 hour ago, Apostle said:

Regarding the figures, what age group were surveyed? It's common knowledge that a majority of females over a certain age are not interested in any sexual activity so these surveys could be biased without knowing the full picture. 

The age group surveyed was both men and women between 15-74.  Over 6000 females and over 4000 males participated.  (I'll see if I can find the survey)

 

I also saw another survey about people who identify as asexual.  I think it's an ongoing survey, and to date, over 113,000 people have participated.  So far, 7% identify as asexual. 

But once again, how accurate is that figure?  If the survey asks (for instance), "What is your sexual orientation?" and gives multiple choice possibilities, including 'Asexual', how is someone going to answer the question accurately if they may not even know what asexuality is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

And also - where's the it being publicised? If it's mostly in LGBTAish outlets, it'll get a higher proportion of nonheteronormative respondents. Is it framed as being about sexual orientation? It will be more likely to attract respondents who see their sexual orientation as an issue in their lives, and therefore get a higher proportion of LGBTAish responses.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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...