scarletlatitude

"Asexual People Can Have Sex Lives — & Here's What They're Like" (TMI maybe?)

Recommended Posts

scarletlatitude

https://www.bustle.com/p/asexual-people-can-have-sex-lives-heres-what-theyre-like-2436642

 

2 Feb 2018

 

TMI maybe... not really TMI but if you don't like to read these topics, then TMI warning.  :P 

 

Spoiler
Quote

When some people hear the word “asexual,” they think of someone who doesn’t have sex. But actually, some asexual people do have sex. And they masturbate. And they look at porn. And they do pretty much everything, because there are as many ways to be asexual as there are to be sexual.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

Ehhh...

 

Yes, asexual people can have sex lives.

 

Can't really say I agree with what is being touted as "asexuality" in that article though.

 

Case in point:

 

Quote

"demisexual slut"

Yeah, okay. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoodwindWhistler

Yeah at this point there is probably a lot of overlap with this, and they just don't have the vocabulary for it:

http://www.medicaldaily.com/sex-drive-doesnt-exist-psychologist-says-more-women-experience-responsive-desire-328206

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
butterflydreams

A lot of what was in this article sounded like normal sexuality to me. Granted, you could argue my interpretation of normal isn't normal because...asexual...but that's how I saw it. Being sexual to connect with a partner? Mmm, I'd do everything I could to make sure we were connecting in other ways long before sex was even on the table.

 

This article honestly upset me. This kind of thing is being paraded as asexuality when it couldn't be further from my experience. Why is there such a desire to show that asexual people can have sex just like anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

A lot of what was in this article sounded like normal sexuality to me.

Yep, and that's exactly how it's going to sound to most sexual folk too.  Just more fuel for the "asexuality doesn't really exist" fire. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fuzzipueo
13 minutes ago, butterflydreams said:

A lot of what was in this article sounded like normal sexuality to me. Granted, you could argue my interpretation of normal isn't normal because...asexual...but that's how I saw it. Being sexual to connect with a partner? Mmm, I'd do everything I could to make sure we were connecting in other ways long before sex was even on the table.

 

This article honestly upset me. This kind of thing is being paraded as asexuality when it couldn't be further from my experience. Why is there such a desire to show that asexual people can have sex just like anyone?

I agree. My asexuality does not work at all like the people in the article state. They sound like some of the folk I've encountered on FB asexual groups too who constantly complain about the impression that asexuality is about not being interested in sex, etc., and get upset when it's pointed out that there are asexuals who are not interested in sex in any form. I also note that there was no attempt to find an asexual person who's only interest is in the romantic side of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred

I think it dilutes the term to the point where it is meaningless. 

 

I don't really like labeling peoples sexual behavior in any case, but if you are going to use labels, there is no point making them so broad that they don't mean anything.  To me someone who voluntarily has sex regularly isn't asexual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StormySky
3 minutes ago, uhtred said:

I think it dilutes the term to the point where it is meaningless. 

 

I don't really like labeling peoples sexual behavior in any case, but if you are going to use labels, there is no point making them so broad that they don't mean anything.  To me someone who voluntarily has sex regularly isn't asexual. 

Pretty much my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus DarkFox

The article is weak on content, no mention of any actual sexual attraction, even to a point that asexuals in the article are actively seeking sex out, beyond the general pleasure of sex.  It got one thing right, it got the grey area fairly covered mostly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cnyb

Why don't more people say, "hey I've been a little sexual lately, not as much as other people, still often asexualish, but you know, I am enjoying some sex, it's a gray-area, apparently I can be sexualish? Used to be mostly asexual, now gray-area"

 

Ah but fluidity is thought to be rare.  I don't think this kind of fluidity is all that rare.  I think that's a lot of what we're seeing.  People go through an asexual or near-asexual mode of existence, and then a mildly sexual mode of existence in a particular situation for  a little while, and over time there's a more or less dark or light gray flavor as to how much they are leaning sexual or asexual.  Or they just have fluctuations of libido or sex drive, or fluctuations in avoidance/exploration of sex.  Dare I say it, a lot of times it is inexperience or a phase, and that's perfectly OK.

 

If the tendency past puberty has mostly been asexual or mostly been sexual, then OK you have a distinct flavor you might identify with as an orientation, but otherwise it seems more accurate to describe modes of expression/lack of expression of sexuality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran

Not exactly a fan of that article, either. 

 

I get it's a small article and they can't go into a lot of detail. But, from the writing... I don't ID as asexual, yet, I find myself going "Wow, I couldn't keep up with those sexual desires in a relationship with them". So, it's kind of going to confuse more than educate, imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Ridiculous.  I had a "normal" sex life; I was an asexual and I really really disliked that "normal" sex life.  If I hadn't disliked it, then I wouldn't have been asexual.   Whether you have sex or not has nothing to do with being asexual; it's how you feel about  the sex.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.

Sorry but practically everything discussed in that article was indicative of very normal sexuality, the author should be embarrassed. I don't even ID as ace anymore and I'm less sexual than some of the people in that article.

 

This is exactly where the 'official' AVEN attitude of 'anyone who wants to be asexual is asexual' gets us. 

 

Sexual people reading that article will be laughing and scoffing about how the ace community is full of snowflakes who want to be special and how asexuality is this fake orientation full of normal people who want a unique label.. It's super frustrating that this kind of nonsense is put out there as asexuality does actually exist and is a very real thing that can cause both asexual people and their sexual partners a lot of pain and turmoil, but it's made into a joke to the general public by articles like that. I can't see a comment section so can't have a rant on the page (seriously, who doesn't have a comment section these days??) but yeah, ridiculous article. Very offensive. Nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.
Quote

"I define asexuality as an orientation where you are attracted to people, but with a lot of caveats," they say. "Sometimes, you're only attracted to folks who are smart, or folks who you connect with. Sometimes, you're attracted to folks, but never want to have sex with them."

This is just one of many utterly ridiculous quotes in that article. This person couldn't be any more normal (sexually) if she tried.

 

Seriously, what do these people think regular sexuality actually is??? 


 

Quote

 

This means that before being physically attracted to someone, they have to like and respect them.

 

Yes because normal people regularly jump into bed with people they hate and look down on, right? Y_Y Those dirty sexuals with their low standards *shakes head*


 

Quote

 

Wolfe has sex with their long-term partner often and masturbates three times a week or more, thinking about people they know or imaginary people. They can't get turned on by thinking about celebrities because they don't know them.

 

 

 

Ah yes, because we all know the only thing that makes someone sexual is the fact that they masturbate over celebrities, right?
 

Quote

 

"As someone who identifies as a demisexual slut, I want folks to know that ace humans can have a ton of sex if they want it and still identify as asexual,

 

......Do I even need to comment on this?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

I was waiting for Pan to have her field day with this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Galactic Turtle

Ah... is it bad if even the picture at the top of the article made me cringe? EHEM.

 

Granted yesterday I did see a group of self-proclaimed "nymphomaniac asexuals" bonding over their shared experiences but maybe I just don't know things.

 

There's no comment section on the site but there is on their Facebook page! ^_^@FictoVore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.
5 hours ago, Galactic Turtle said:

Ah... is it bad if even the picture at the top of the article made me cringe? EHEM.

 

Granted yesterday I did see a group of self-proclaimed "nymphomaniac asexuals" bonding over their shared experiences but maybe I just don't know things.

 

There's no comment section on the site but there is on their Facebook page! ^_^@FictoVore.

 Haha well there's no such thing as a nymphomaniac asexual UNLESS they mean that their libido is out of control so they can't stop masturbating (but still obviously wouldn't seek partnered sex to relieve the arousal). I can't really comment on the Facebook groups because my Facebook page is under my real name and as a writer (even though I use a pseudonym to write with) I'm super paranoid that someone will stalk me extensively enough to discover my real identity then someone how link that identity back to my AVEN posts through Facebook D: Sounds paranoid but it happened to me twice when I was on FetLife (I still don't know how! Never even used my real identity for anything at all to do with FetLife!!!!) so now I avoid using my real identity to comment on asexuality things with Facebook just in case I get linked back to AVEN and then people find out on the website that I write for D: 

 

Edit: Disqus is the best way to comment online, I think all websites should use it as it means audiences can engage with the content!! that'll bring them back clicking your content meaning you get more money, win-win for everyone. I often feel that sites not using a comments section are trying to silence people with opposing opinions.. and I mean, the author of that article would know she'd get her butt kicked if they enabled comments under that piece of garbage :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoodwindWhistler
On 2/9/2018 at 3:19 AM, Sally said:

Ridiculous.  I had a "normal" sex life; I was an asexual and I really really disliked that "normal" sex life.  If I hadn't disliked it, then I wouldn't have been asexual.   Whether you have sex or not has nothing to do with being asexual; it's how you feel about  the sex.  

Well at present only the initial draw- attraction- about sex is at the forefront of the definition. Which is why there are so many calls to change the definition. Have you read stuff about that?

 

On 2/9/2018 at 5:38 AM, FictoVore. said:

This is exactly where the 'official' AVEN attitude of 'anyone who wants to be asexual is asexual' gets us. 

 

Sexual people reading that article will be laughing and scoffing about how the ace community is full of snowflakes who want to be special and how asexuality is this fake orientation full of normal people who want a unique label.. It's super frustrating that this kind of nonsense is put out there as asexuality does actually exist and is a very real thing that can cause both asexual people and their sexual partners a lot of pain and turmoil, but it's made into a joke to the general public by articles like that. I can't see a comment section so can't have a rant on the page (seriously, who doesn't have a comment section these days??) but yeah, ridiculous article. Very offensive. Nonsense.


The alternative to that "general" approach is that we be gatekeepers. Look where that got the trans community. I know which set of problems I prefer!

 Communicating and being open and loose to ideas of both normal and abnormal sexualities in the quest to get to know ourselves and each other better, at the risk of being "too inclusive" for the average joe, but not for people on the fence, or be at each others' throats over terms and hard definitions so that average joe is appeased.

(who isn't really invested anyway, and doesn't care, or else they would be curious and make the same effort we do to actually understand)

But yeah, totally, who DOESN'T have a comment section nowadays? Very unprofessional and cowardly. 

"I define asexuality as an orientation where you are attracted to people, but with a lot of caveats," they say. "Sometimes, you're only attracted to folks who are smart, or folks who you connect with. Sometimes, you're attracted to folks, but never want to have sex with them."

Honestly, I think this is an example of the "False norm" created by media. People have been duped into thinking that "Normal" is when you instantly fall in love with someone, or within the plot span of a 2 hour movie, and must act on it ('pop science' actually doesn't help there, it maintains the unremittingly sex-compulsory attitude that sex is a good all the time). This is not a problem with people per se, but the ideas we have fed.

I mentioned this in the thread where Pan originally shared the article I linked- that if "demisexual" "graysexual" or "responsive desire" is actually fairly "normal" then it's a GOOD thing we finally have terms for things that were sort of 'culturally invisible' before, and only getting more erasure as cultural becomes more sexual. The fact that we have to go through growing pains as a society to realize this is besides the point. 
 

"This means that before being physically attracted to someone, they have to like and respect them."


Toxic, drama-filled relationships get more attention. An unfortunate false norm. 

"Ah yes, because we all know the only thing that makes someone sexual is the fact that they masturbate over celebrities, right?"

A predominantly male-style, modern-era false norm. Growing more and more commonplace as women are devalued and dehumanized. Even increasingly apparent among both sexes. 

Yes, this discussion should be *different*, and maybe we should send the author a letter with some signatures perhaps, but it's easy to see where the confusion stems from. If these people need to distance themselves from self-destructive romo-normativity and these are the tools they use to do it, I say whatever liberates them from that beast. I'll linguistically handle whatever average joe objects, because I can see both sides of the issue. If average joe seeks to invalidate asexual people OR trans people it is because some others are suffering from either (a) what he considers an *actual* norm vs a false one and they are prudes or just need to "get laid" more and more mindlessly or (b) he has a wider spread of what constitutes normal. I will determine which it is, and start the conversation from there.

The general thrust of what's happening- that people don't want to accept toxic things as normal- is a good thing. Maybe eventually we will have a WORD for toxic relationships that isn't "crush" or "in love" but specifically self-destructive. Then the tables will have turned! (I'm thinking of that being an issue in my novel, actually. There will be several made up languages)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fuzzipueo
1 hour ago, WoodwindWhistler said:

But yeah, totally, who DOESN'T have a comment section nowadays? Very unprofessional and cowardly. 

Forbes, CNN, Businessweek, Business Insider, Bloomberg ... and I think a lot the ones which did have them have taken them over to FB or some other social media site - in part because the comments section can get very contentious and no one seems willing to actually do anything to keep a handle on the interactions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

No comment section usually just means they don't feel like moderating it.  Often times (particularly on youtube), comments USED to be open until a content creator closes them for getting too heated/argumentative/stupid and they don't want to have to continuously police that kind of negativity on their channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Law of Circles

This article seems to focus only on the experiences of sex-favorable people (I won't comment on whether I think they are asexual or not, as that's another can of worms). I don't think it's representative of what most asexuals who have sex experience. What about sex-neutral asexuals who are totally indifferent to sex but willing to have it under certain circumstances? Or the sex-repulsed who find it very difficult to have sex? I feel like those experiences are much more common than those of the people described in the article. The article claims that asexuals are diverse, but it doesn't seem to do a very good job of including different asexual experiences, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.
On 2/12/2018 at 8:25 PM, Law of Circles said:

This article seems to focus only on the experiences of sex-favorable people (I won't comment on whether I think they are asexual or not, as that's another can of worms). I don't think it's representative of what most asexuals who have sex experience. What about sex-neutral asexuals who are totally indifferent to sex but willing to have it under certain circumstances? Or the sex-repulsed who find it very difficult to have sex? I feel like those experiences are much more common than those of the people described in the article. The article claims that asexuals are diverse, but it doesn't seem to do a very good job of including different asexual experiences, IMO.

Yeah exactly. And on the flip-side, the experiences described in the article are very, very common for sexual people. Almost every sexual person who reads it will be able to relate to a lot of what's said in this article about 'asexuality', whereas  the vast majority of aces (even the ones who have sex with their partner!!) will be reading it and freaking out a bit thinking 'uuum, no, that's not what it's like for me at all'. *shakes my head*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now