Jump to content

What Non-Ace People Need to Know (Cause they're Getting Annoying)


BossofRunes

Recommended Posts

This is basically a list of stuff I see in like, YouTube comments and stuff. It is getting very annoying to see the exact same question or insult, so here ya' go. (and if I get something wrong at all, just lemme know what yall would say)

 

"But why do some asexuals like sex??? All asexuals hate sex."

There are different types of asexuals. Some are more lenient to sex than others. Ace people who enjoy sex are normally sex-positive. Please research what types of aces there are before asking this.

 

"But people NEED to have sex. Literally the reason humans are able to have sex. It's an instinct."

Asexuals don't NEED to have sex. No one needs to have sex technically. If someone doesn't feel the urge to have sex, then who the hell says we are obligated to it? We can have a WANT for sex, just not a need.

 

"I'm preeetty sure it's an illness. *Insert doctor crap here*, therefore it isn't possible."

Maybe for some people it is, but for others it isn't an illness. If it was, wouldn't we have found out at some point before reading/hearing your stupid comment?

 

"So you're a virgin? Jeez, you need to try it before you call yourself something stupid."

There are a lot of aces who aren't virgins. A some even have children. And if I need to try something before I know I don't like it, how about stabbing yourself in the eye. Maybe you're a masochist and don't even know it :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"So you're a virgin? Jeez, you need to try it before you call yourself something stupid."

There are a lot of aces who aren't virgins. A some even have children. And if I need to try something before I know I don't like it, how about stabbing yourself in the eye. Maybe you're a masochist and don't even know it :) 

You made my day with this one. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Love the total switch in people's tones of voice when you tell them, suddenly speaking to you like you're a child when you're ten years older.

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

You made my day with this one. :P

yeah I was excited to write that part XD

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

I Love the total switch in people's tones of voice when you tell them, suddenly speaking to you like you're a child when you're ten years older.

ikr?! It's so weird and painful to hear

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BossofRunes said:

"But why do some asexuals like sex??? All asexuals hate sex."

Because asexuality is a spectrum like any other sexuality. Ace people who enjoy sex are normally sex-positive. Please research what types of aces there are before asking this.

Eh, I'm ace, and I myself am real iffy on that point there. What can I say. I can be a bit stupid like that sometimes. *shrug

Link to post
Share on other sites
letusdeleteouraccounts

I agree with you but asexuality is not a spectrum. It literally has one definition which is a person who hasn’t experienced sexual attraction. 0 isn’t a spectrum. Compared to other sexualities, asexuality is basically without sexuality. Once you experience sexual attraction, your sexuality is based on what gender(s) you’re attracted to

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Star Lion said:

I agree with you but asexuality is not a spectrum. It literally has one definition which is a person who hasn’t experienced sexual attraction. 0 isn’t a spectrum. Compared to other sexualities, asexuality is basically without sexuality. Once you experience sexual attraction, your sexuality is based on what gender(s) you’re attracted to

I always thought it was since there's three main types of aces (sex-repulsed, neutral, and positive). Sorry if I worded that wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites
letusdeleteouraccounts

Well, I get your point but I’d say no since that whole thing is more about preferences and it would be weird to put a spectrum on preferences

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Star Lion said:

Well, I get your point but I’d say no since that whole thing is more about preferences and it would be weird to put a spectrum on preferences

yeye I got ya

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Whatsis said:

Eh, I'm ace, and I myself am real iffy on that point there. What can I say. I can be a bit stupid like that sometimes. *shrug

Don't worry, im stupid about things, too, sometimes. Happens, lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about asexuality being a spectrum, that there could be a grey-asexuals where it's just not very clear to the person if the person can fall under sexual. Something that's erased from here time and time solely because some people believe it is impossible to know what you want/don't want or something on the line of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BossofRunes said:

Don't worry, im stupid about things, too, sometimes. Happens, lol

Hey, look at us two bozos! Disagreeing on points of ace-annoyance quite amicably and nice! :lol: :cake:

 

The spectrum thingy, I see like this: The spectrum goes from asexual, that's a big fat zero, all the way to sexual to the tenth degree, let's say, towards hypersexual. So, whether you're a 9 or a 0.01 on that scale, you'd still be sexual, as in 0.01-sexual or 9-sexual. Asexual is and remains 0. Makes sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Autumn Season
3 minutes ago, BossofRunes said:

I always thought it was [a spectrum] since there's three main types of aces (sex-repulsed, neutral, and positive). Sorry if I worded that wrong

The word "spectrum" is often used with the meaning that anything is possible - from 0% to 100% asexuality, this is why it can be a little problematic. Some (many?) asexuals don't want to be asked whether they want sex sometimes or rarely, when in reality they never want it. A(n a)sexual spectrum furthermore doesn't make sense, if you follow the definition, that you either experience sexual attraction or not (and that there is nothing in between).

 

You mean the spectrum of sex positivity. However this is relevant for all people, including aces AND sexuals. As strange as this might sound, sexuals can be sex negative. This is usually a problem for them, but perhaps not always.

Another thing worth mentioning is that sex positivity can mean two different things: 1) Being comfortable when having sex and 2) seeing sex as something positive, even if one never wants and never likes having sex personally.

 

So for instance there can be an asexual person, who never wants sex and ids as sex positive. There can be a sexual person, who sometimes wants sex and ids as sex positive. (If you use another definition for asexuality, then) There can be a grey sexual person and they can be sex positive. And everyone can be sex neutral or negative or repulsed. 

 

To your original post: I can relate to the frustration, when people ask the same ignorant questions over and over again. At some point I just want to be accepted and not questioned... Then again I can understand their confusion to some extent. It's not like they feel what aces feel and they weren't raised with the concept of asexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, BossofRunes said:

yeye I got ya

Don't worry, I once pointed out to @Star Lion that there is something called the Ace Spectrum (which includes what you've said) and they explained that they're aware, and don't call it an Ace Spectrum since the differences aren't unique to Asexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
1 hour ago, Star Lion said:

Well, I get your point but I’d say no since that whole thing is more about preferences and it would be weird to put a spectrum on preferences

I disagree about asexuality not being a spectrum and I also think that attitudes towards possibly having sex are pretty much a spectrum of different thoughtfeelings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whatsis said:

Hey, look at us two bozos! Disagreeing on points of ace-annoyance quite amicably and nice! :lol: :cake:

 

The spectrum thingy, I see like this: The spectrum goes from asexual, that's a big fat zero, all the way to sexual to the tenth degree, let's say, towards hypersexual. So, whether you're a 9 or a 0.01 on that scale, you'd still be sexual, as in 0.01-sexual or 9-sexual. Asexual is and remains 0. Makes sense?

Ye I got ya! It's all a bit confusing sometimes I guess, lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, BossofRunes said:

This is basically a list of stuff I see in like, YouTube comments and stuff. It is getting very annoying to see the exact same question or insult, so here ya' go. (and if I get something wrong at all, just lemme know what yall would say)

 

"But why do some asexuals like sex??? All asexuals hate sex."

There are different types of asexuals. Some are more lenient to sex than others. Ace people who enjoy sex are normally sex-positive. Please research what types of aces there are before asking this.

 

"But people NEED to have sex. Literally the reason humans are able to have sex. It's an instinct."

Asexuals don't NEED to have sex. No one needs to have sex technically. If someone doesn't feel the urge to have sex, then who the hell says we are obligated to it? We can have a WANT for sex, just not a need.

 

"I'm preeetty sure it's an illness. *Insert doctor crap here*, therefore it isn't possible."

Maybe for some people it is, but for others it isn't an illness. If it was, wouldn't we have found out at some point before reading/hearing your stupid comment?

 

"So you're a virgin? Jeez, you need to try it before you call yourself something stupid."

There are a lot of aces who aren't virgins. A some even have children. And if I need to try something before I know I don't like it, how about stabbing yourself in the eye. Maybe you're a masochist and don't even know it :) 

Asexual means lack of sexual attractions to others not lack of sexual urge though. This makes it sound like some have sex with others for desire while others don't. I also get irritated when people state others need to get laid as it part of the status qou. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll add another one- Asexuals can masturbate and its no one's business if they do 

I will say though that a lot of sexual people do understand these things and the more asexuality is mentioned, hopefully the less we will need to point these things out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, being ace means you do not want to have sex with other people.  That gets rid of the problematic "sexual attraction" business,  which causes so much arguing.  I also don't think being ace is being on a spectrum.  If there are times/places/people which cause you to want to have sex with someone, you're not asexual.   And many asexuals do have sex, but it's  for other reasons, not because they want sex for sex's sake (i.e., for their pleasure).  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anger is the answer.

Those people are offended for some reason, but in the grand scheme of things, they don't matter. I understand how it can be frustrating, but in the end, (assuming you live in America or someplace with similar laws), we are free to live the way we want to, and we don't need to justify ourselves to anyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ben8884 said:

I'll add another one- Asexuals can masturbate and its no one's business if they do 

I will say though that a lot of sexual people do understand these things and the more asexuality is mentioned, hopefully the less we will need to point these things out. 

I always thought that was a weird question to ask anyone. Does it matter?

 

14 hours ago, Sally said:

For me, being ace means you do not want to have sex with other people.  That gets rid of the problematic "sexual attraction" business,  which causes so much arguing.  I also don't think being ace is being on a spectrum.  If there are times/places/people which cause you to want to have sex with someone, you're not asexual.   And many asexuals do have sex, but it's  for other reasons, not because they want sex for sex's sake (i.e., for their pleasure).  

A lot of people married before they knew they were ACE (like myself)  and had sex because we thought that was the way things were supposed to happen. After my first few times, I suffered from depressive episodes which were confusing.  I stumbled around for years knowing something was wrong and blamed other things ( thinking my religious upbringing made me sex-negative for example).  If left to my own devices, I was fine without it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, I'm pretty sure I out-annoy every sexual person with the noob questions I ask my average sexual friends :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2018 at 9:25 PM, Autumn Season said:

The word "spectrum" is often used with the meaning that anything is possible - from 0% to 100% asexuality, this is why it can be a little problematic. Some (many?) asexuals don't want to be asked whether they want sex sometimes or rarely, when in reality they never want it. A(n a)sexual spectrum furthermore doesn't make sense, if you follow the definition, that you either experience sexual attraction or not (and that there is nothing in between)

 

Are you sexual according to your definition if you have felt sexual attraction once in your life? Is not the definition of no to extremely rare sexual attraction a better definition for asexuality, as the experience of people experiencing sexual attraction very rarely is much more similar to people never experiencing sexual attraction than to people experiencing sexual attraction on an average level. Would you only include sex repulsed aces in the definition? And is it sexual attraction if you enjoy sex with a partner, but don't miss it if there is no sex and don't think about it when it is not happening?

 

I can understand wanting to have clear cut definitions as they seem to make life easier, but humans are to complicated for this and you will always have fuzzy definitions.

A problem with the definition of only zero and not 0.001% sexual attraction as asexual is that it excludes many people and is dismissive of their experience and it includes the tendency of excluding people for not being ace enough.

 

An other example: Is a man homosexual if he is to 99% attracted to men and to 1% to women? Or is in the end everyone bisexual as the definitions for all other sexual orientations are so rigid that almost nobody is homo-, hetero-, pan- or asexual?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Are you sexual according to your definition if you have felt sexual attraction once in your life?

In my book, yes, because that means the potential for it is there.

 

That's not to say that people who experience it rarely might still be able to identify better with asexuals, but that still does not make them the same as asexuals.

 

Quote

And is it sexual attraction if you enjoy sex with a partner, but don't miss it if there is no sex and don't think about it when it is not happening? 

No.  Enjoying =/= desiring and pursuing.

 

Quote

A problem with the definition of only zero and not 0.001% sexual attraction as asexual is that it excludes many people and is dismissive of their experience and it includes the tendency of excluding people for not being ace enough.

Asexuality is not there to cater to whims and act as some all-inclusive club.  It's there to put a name to a rarity among sexualities.

 

In short, if people who basically exhibit the traits of typical sexual people feel "excluded" from asexuality, I say too fucking bad.

 

Quote

An other example: Is a man homosexual if he is to 99% attracted to men and to 1% to women? Or is in the end everyone bisexual as the definitions for all other sexual orientations are so rigid that almost nobody is homo-, hetero-, pan- or asexual? 

Yes, that would be bisexual with a preference for same sex.  That "1%" still indicates the possibility of a different-sex attraction is there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to point out this out, possibility =/= actuality. It doesn't mean that it's there. Under Philips' interpretation, I'd be sexual, but every years passing the date confirms that there's no possibility I'd be actually interested into sex with others for my own sake, and if there is a possibility, then it's less than 1 in a billion at this point. Which says, not happening at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Autumn Season
13 hours ago, Bloc said:

Are you sexual according to your definition if you have felt sexual attraction once in your life? Is not the definition of no to extremely rare sexual attraction a better definition for asexuality, as the experience of people experiencing sexual attraction very rarely is much more similar to people never experiencing sexual attraction than to people experiencing sexual attraction on an average level. Would you only include sex repulsed aces in the definition? And is it sexual attraction if you enjoy sex with a partner, but don't miss it if there is no sex and don't think about it when it is not happening?

 

I can understand wanting to have clear cut definitions as they seem to make life easier, but humans are to complicated for this and you will always have fuzzy definitions.

A problem with the definition of only zero and not 0.001% sexual attraction as asexual is that it excludes many people and is dismissive of their experience and it includes the tendency of excluding people for not being ace enough.

 

An other example: Is a man homosexual if he is to 99% attracted to men and to 1% to women? Or is in the end everyone bisexual as the definitions for all other sexual orientations are so rigid that almost nobody is homo-, hetero-, pan- or asexual?

Thanks for your reply. :) In turn, this is my long-winded answer. ;)


Spoiler to make my comment look shorter, haha.

 

 

 

Quote

your definition


It is not mine. I use „In a perfect life, would I prefer to be sexually active?“. I brought up the definition “no sexual attraction”, because it’s the most common one, it was relevant to the question of whether there is an asexual spectrum and because the poster above me used this definition. I just rolled with it. See my comment: “A(n a)sexual spectrum furthermore doesn't make sense, if you follow the definition, that you either experience sexual attraction or not (and that there is nothing in between)“. If you follow the definition and only if, then a certain argument can‘t be made, was my point.
 

Quote

Are you sexual according to your definition if you have felt sexual attraction once in your life?

 
(The definition here being “no sexual attraction”.)

No. Not if you interpret it in a strict way.

One can however say for instance that one is not experiencing sexuality right now and it is unlikely that one will in the future, thus the definition can be applied to the present time.

Furthermore one can make a distinction based on the number of times, which one has felt an attraction. Once a year could qualify as asexual. Twice a year could be sexual.

One can also argue qualitatively. For example if the attraction is very brief, then one can still be ace. Or if it doesn’t lead to wanting sex, then one can still be ace. (By the way, the definition of sexual attraction according to AVEN is wanting to engage in a partnered sexual activity. With this subdefinition, the example above doesn’t make sense of course. But personally I believe that a sexual attraction won’t always lead to wanting sex.) Or one feels sexually for a second, but this doesn’t have an impact on an otherwise asexual life.

All of these arguments can be made regardless of whether there is or isn’t a sexual spectrum.

One can also say that there is a sexual spectrum. For instance sexual attraction less than six times a year is asexual, less than or exactly once a month is grey-sexual and more than once a month is sexual.

In reality aces interpret asexuality in many different ways. I have only brought up a few examples. I’m sure that each definition has its benefits and will fit one life-experience especially well, while it misrepresents another.

I find it especially important to bring up the differences in the ace community, because I believe that it partially explains the confusion in the sexual community. Everybody will explain asexuality in their own way and the explanations sometimes, if not often, clash. Somebody will say that one cannot experience sexual attraction but one can want sex and still be ace. Another will say that it’s all about whether one wants sex or not. It is not surprising then that the listener will be confused.
 

Quote

Is not the definition of no to extremely rare sexual attraction a better definition for asexuality, as the experience of people experiencing sexual attraction very rarely is much more similar to people never experiencing sexual attraction than to people experiencing sexual attraction on an average level.

 
If I was asked to decide between the “no sexual attraction” and the “no to rare attraction” definition, then I would prefer the second one, yes. I agree with your argument.

For the sake of avoiding misunderstandings, I would like to point out two things. 1) Both definitions don’t require a sexual spectrum to exist. 2) Personally I do believe that there is a(n a)sexual spectrum, but I don’t agree with the way many people use the term. For instance I don’t think that whether or not someone is sex negative or repulsed has anything to do with the asexual spectrum. I mean, of course sex negativity can be interrelated with asexuality, but it doesn’t have to be.
 

Quote

Would you only include sex repulsed aces in the definition?

 
No. The sexual spectrum and the sex positivity spectrum exist independently. It is theoretically possible to both want sex and be repulsed by it. (Not necessarily in the same moment.)

Maybe you mean to ask “Would you only include aces who don’t desire sex in the definition?”. In this case, perhaps.

First of all I’d like to explain a little what I mean by “want sex”. I mean “for one’s own physical and/ or emotional pleasure”. So if one is having sex to make a baby or please a partner (and pleasing the partner isn’t sexually pleasurable in itself), then it doesn’t count.

Why do I think that “not desire sex” is a helpful definition for asexuality? First of all it is comparably easy. Thus less confusion, thus less frustrating questions when explaining asexuality. Secondly, I believe that defining asexuality is especially important when entering a romantic (or queer platonic) relationship. A sexual person wants to know whether their (future) significant other will have sex with them or not. Saying that an asexual basically doesn’t want sex, simplifies the matter and provides the sexual with important information. Similarly an asexual who prefers celibacy, wants to know whether their (future) significant other will want to have sex with them or not.

The “no to rare attraction” definition is more helpful for finding and knowing one’s own identity. It doesn’t say anything about what one does, but it does say how one feels.
 

Quote

And is it sexual attraction if you enjoy sex with a partner, but don't miss it if there is no sex and don't think about it when it is not happening?

 
Is it sexual attraction? Yes.

Is it asexuality? Depends.

Demi-sexuals typically only desire sex when they are with a partner. (They can however still want sex when they are in a relationship and cannot see their partner at the moment.) Demis are grey-sexual. On the sexual spectrum this is in the middle between asexual and sexual. Depending on whether you think that grey is ace or sexual, then it is or isn’t asexuality.

Women typically only desire sex when they are making out with a partner. They are sexual (if they enjoy sex with a partner). If I remember correctly, the ratio is that 70 % of women and 30 % of men only want sex after some stimulation.
 

Quote

I can understand wanting to have clear cut definitions as they seem to make life easier, but humans are to complicated for this and you will always have fuzzy definitions.

 
It is true that definitions simplify complicated matters. Some people dislike labels for this reason. They say that one shouldn’t put oneself into a box. One is a human and not a document, haha. It makes sense.

Then again, what about the words “homosexual” and “heterosexual”. A homo wants sex with a partner of their own gender, a hetero wants sex with a partner of the opposite gender. Usually people use these clear cut definitions and it’s rare that somebody complains about them.

And are definitions useful at all if they are not clear?
 

Quote

A problem with the definition of only zero and not 0.001% sexual attraction as asexual is that it excludes many people and is dismissive of their experience and it includes the tendency of excluding people for not being ace enough.

 
Generally speaking I don’t think that exclusion is a problem. This is exactly what definitions are supposed to do. Otherwise we might as well drop the word “asexual” and say that we are all human beings, which is not wrong, by the way. “Hetero” excludes “homo”, “sexual” excludes “asexual”. One can say that there are no clear boundaries and this is probably your argument, but even if they are blurred, the boundaries still exist.

From here on I will use the “not want sex”-definition:

Personally, I am in favor of a definition which allows many exceptions. For instance “Generally speaking an asexual person is somebody who prefers not to have sex. But (1) they can be sexually active, (2) they can see sex as something positive, (3) in the past they could have been sexual, however now they don’t want sex and it is unlikely to change, (4) ...”.

I’m of the opinion that grey-sexual people are sexual. So for example a person who only wants sex once a month or only non-penetrative or wants sex but doesn’t find their partner/ anyone attractive, is sexual. This is because a sexual person can be asked “How (many times) do you want sex?” and an asexual person can only be asked “Do you want sex?”.

I agree with you that with this kind of definition, there will be a lot of people, who count as sexual, but relate more closely to the asexual community. This is why I understand the appeal of having a wide meaning of the word asexual. There are good arguments in its favor. I think that the grey and ace are closely related and should celebrate their similarities. I also believe that often enough it is not clear whether a person is ace or sexual. This is unproblematic, because they can choose their identity or of course go without a label. On the other side those who like having a label and fit into a clear definition, have it easier to find their identity and communicate it to the world.
 

Quote

An other example: Is a man homosexual if he is to 99% attracted to men and to 1% to women? Or is in the end everyone bisexual as the definitions for all other sexual orientations are so rigid that almost nobody is homo-, hetero-, pan- or asexual?

 
According to Japan, he would be heterosexual, haha. Probably. I read too many manga... Anyway!

I’d say he’s gay, unless he is in a long-term hetero relationship.

I get your point though. It doesn’t make sense to create rigid definitions, if as a result everyone has to use a catch-all definition.

Personally I see asexuality as a minority and this is why it is ok that not many people fit the definition. When I read other comments, then half the population is ace and we meet the sexual people in the middle on the sexual spectrum. In theory this is alright. But then what point is there to “out” oneself and say one is ace? It could mean anything really: That one wants sex never or often, that one is attracted never or often, that one wants a platonic or a sexual relationship...
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Autumn Season
11 hours ago, Philip027 said:

Enjoying =/= desiring and pursuing.

Thanks for saying this! :) I tend to forget about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh...I sense another definition debate...

I just wanna say that I don;t think ALL sexuals are like this. I hope that eventually as asexuality becomes more known there won't be so many questions like this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ben8884 said:

Uh oh...I sense another definition debate...

I just wanna say that I don;t think ALL sexuals are like this. I hope that eventually as asexuality becomes more known there won't be so many questions like this. 

Um, there's still plenty of disagreement among sex researchers regarding what defines sexuality. Asexuality being known will not change that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...