RoseGoesToYale Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 I noticed the feminist attitudes toward asexuality section in Wikipedia was quite sparse, but this article from 1977 stuck out. I went searching online and couldn't find it anywhere, save a summary. So after venturing to the stacks and a few misplaced call letters later, I found the article. It's by Myra T. Johnson, titled "Asexual and Autoerotic Women: Two Invisible Groups" I was kind of surprised to see a journal article about asexuality that far back that's not Kinsey, and I was a little skeptical at what I would read. To my surprise, she genuinely talks about how asexuality has been downplayed or erased by society and proposes a radical shift in thinking about sexuality. Also, it's relatively short and not ridiculously wordy, yay! I was kind of mad this is nowhere to be found on the internet, so I photocopied it with my phone and uploaded it as a PDF (copyright disclaimer: FAIR USE) https://ibin.co/4GxspwD0M8Qs (let me know if you can't access it, my apologies for the crappy xerox-like quality) Some things: *A few female anatomical terms and one curse word are used *The term "autoerotic" isn't really used much these days, if at all. Here it seems to be much closer to autochorissexual. The author makes a distinction between the two terms. *The article mainly focuses on women, but she does bring up asexual men in a footnote about the Vietnam War as an escape from heteronormativity back home, which I'd never even heard of. There are lots of things about that war that I don't yet understand. *The magazine thing. This is completely why I don't read magazines, because it's nothing but sex positions and lacy underwear and how to apply sexy makeup, yada. And the fact that there were women back then challenging this, it's really encouraging. Maybe we should write a few letters to the editors. Please feel free to read and discuss! Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Thanks for the PDF file. I admire your drive to locate that article. Good work! 👍 FYI, I'm also not a fan of certain types of magazines. I find the sex talk to be either boring or quite amusing. Am pretty sure that wasn't what the writers were going for! Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, RoseGoesToYale said: I noticed the feminist attitudes toward asexuality section in Wikipedia was quite sparse, but this article from 1977 stuck out. I went searching online and couldn't find it anywhere, save a summary. So after venturing to the stacks and a few misplaced call letters later, I found the article. It's by Myra T. Johnson, titled "Asexual and Autoerotic Women: Two Invisible Groups" I was kind of surprised to see a journal article about asexuality that far back that's not Kinsey, and I was a little skeptical at what I would read. To my surprise, she genuinely talks about how asexuality has been downplayed or erased by society and proposes a radical shift in thinking about sexuality. Also, it's relatively short and not ridiculously wordy, yay! I was kind of mad this is nowhere to be found on the internet, so I photocopied it with my phone and uploaded it as a PDF (copyright disclaimer: FAIR USE) https://ibin.co/4GxspwD0M8Qs (let me know if you can't access it, my apologies for the crappy xerox-like quality) Some things: *A few female anatomical terms and one curse word are used *The term "autoerotic" isn't really used much these days, if at all. Here it seems to be much closer to autochorissexual. The author makes a distinction between the two terms. *The article mainly focuses on women, but she does bring up asexual men in a footnote about the Vietnam War as an escape from heteronormativity back home, which I'd never even heard of. There are lots of things about that war that I don't yet understand. *The magazine thing. This is completely why I don't read magazines, because it's nothing but sex positions and lacy underwear and how to apply sexy makeup, yada. And the fact that there were women back then challenging this, it's really encouraging. Maybe we should write a few letters to the editors. Please feel free to read and discuss! Oh dear, I opened it and just got a bunch of jumbled letters :c Maybe you could upload the images to https://imgbb.com/ and share the links here? Yup that's why I get a little frustrated with everyone saying David Jay coined the term and that we must doggedly stick to his definition about attraction (meaning you can love having sex as long as you don't experience attraction). The term Asexual has been used for decades now, long before AVEN, to define an actual sexual orientation where you don't desire sex with other people, and the conflict over the definition these days only serves to hinder the same visibility people have been trying to achieve for asexuality since the 70s. Check out this song: Link to post Share on other sites
divided_sky Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 33 minutes ago, FictoVore. said: Oh dear, I opened it and just got a bunch of jumbled letters :c Maybe you could upload the images to https://imgbb.com/ and share the links here? Yup that's why I get a little frustrated with everyone saying David Jay coined the term and that we must doggedly stick to his definition about attraction (meaning you can love having sex as long as you don't experience attraction). The term Asexual has been used for decades now, long before AVEN, to define an actual sexual orientation where you don't desire sex with other people, and the conflict over the definition these days only serves to hinder the same visibility people have been trying to achieve for asexuality since the 70s. This is infuriating. Especially when someone has just joined this site, having discovered asexuality the day before, and immediately begins telling other people what asexuality is by quoting the top of this site. The definition debates are beyond exhausting but I also don't understand the adherence to AVEN's official definition, as if they coined the term asexual and thus are the only entity allowed to make any attempt to define it. It's bizarre Link to post Share on other sites
RoseGoesToYale Posted September 26, 2018 Author Share Posted September 26, 2018 @FictoVore. ImgBB won't let me upload PDFs, so I tried another hosting site: https://www.docdroid.net/WqRM0mJ/aa.pdf Let me know if this one doesn't work either Link to post Share on other sites
thylacine Posted September 28, 2018 Share Posted September 28, 2018 Oh my God I love that song, it's so funny, what a riot! Link to post Share on other sites
tontonguetonks Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 This may be a long shot, given that this thread was from 2 years ago, but I did find the scan of the article OP was talking about, but I have no idea what book it’s actually from. Is anyone able to help me out? I’d like to use it for a paper, but I can’t cite it in full, and I’m having a hard time finding evidence of this paper at all (even using university databases)! ETA: Apologies, I did end up finding what book it was from. For anyone else interested: Gochros, H. L., & Gochros, J. S. (1977). The sexually oppressed. Association Press. Link to post Share on other sites
Janus the Fox Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 Thread Locked as it's 2 years old, while the Comment has provided a Citation, this maybe useful to update a Books about Asexuality Thread Janus DarkFox Cover Welcome Lounge, Current Questions about Asexuality, Asexual Musings and Rantings & Open Mic Moderator Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.