What's the BEST word for those who are not asexual?

[TheMaria]

I don't like any of the ones I know:

 

sexual - implies non-aces are hypersexual & aces are devoid of sexuality;

allosexual - problematic in Quebec + originally an antonym for "autosexual", hence excludes autosexuals (which it shouldn't, since they are not asexual either);

zedsexual - I'd prefer an etymology tha made sense content-wise, not just form-wise.

Are there other possiblities?

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

I honestly believe that allosexual is the best term but if people have a problem with it, I’ll use another term like “sexual”. I’ve never heard of zedsexual

[Philip027]

Personally, I feel sexual is fine.

 

Quote

sexual - implies non-aces are hypersexual & aces are devoid of sexuality;

I don't feel either of these implications are there.

 

You know what word makes asexuals sound like they are devoid of sexuality?  Asexual.  That's simply a matter of people thinking it refers strictly to behavior rather than orientation, though.

[lonelyace]

Sexual and allosexual are the only terms that I've ever heard. You might have to make up and spread a new term.

[Just Somebody]

Allosexual or zedsexual are the only ones I've heard , and  maybe "the f*ckers"  too ? Lol

[nanogretchen4]

I think all of the sexuals on AVEN refer to themselves as sexuals. So I guess you can use some term that is not their preferred term when you gossip about them, but keep in mind that they are right here listening. Sexuals who haven't had any contact with the asexual community certainly aren't going to be craving a fancy new label just to say that they aren't asexual. First you would have to explain asexuality to the whole world, then you could try to get 99% of the world's population to use the label you have made up for them. They will be irritated, and they won't use the label, but you will have achieved global asexual awareness, so mission accomplished.

[TheMaria]

Just now, nanogretchen4 said:

I think all of the sexuals on AVEN refer to themselves as sexuals. So I guess you can use some term that is not their preferred term when you gossip about them, but keep in mind that they are right here listening. Sexuals who haven't had any contact with the asexual community certainly aren't going to be craving a fancy new label just to say that they aren't asexual. First you would have to explain asexuality to the whole world, then you could try to get 99% of the world's population to use the label you have made up for them. They will be irritated, and they won't use the label, but you will have achieved global asexual awareness, so mission accomplished.

"'cisgender' is a slur"

[nanogretchen4]

Huh? The term "cisgender" has been voluntarily adopted by many cisgender allies of the trans community, and to my knowledge there is no preferred alternate term suggested by cisgender allies. On AVEN the sexual allies do indeed have a preferred term for themselves, so it might make sense to use it.

[everywhere and nowhere]

Just now, nanogretchen4 said:

Huh? The term "cisgender" has been voluntarily adopted by many cisgender allies of the trans community, and to my knowledge there is no preferred alternate term suggested by cisgender allies. On AVEN the sexual allies do indeed have a preferred term for themselves, so it might make sense to use it.

Mind the quotes. It seems to me that @TheMaria meant that "allosexual" is as much of an offensive word as "cisgender".

[gisiebob]

cergextudle.

 

as long as you aren't saying there is a best word for something, ain't much reason to find one.

also: what's up with Quebec?

[nanogretchen4]

Well, it was a bit cryptic. I thought the quotes meant TheMaria was trying to put words in my mouth that I would never have said because I disagree with them.

[TheMaria]

1 minute ago, Nowhere Girl said:

Mind the quotes. It seems to me that @TheMaria meant that "allosexual" is as much of an offensive word as "cisgender".

No, I do find "allosexual" problematic, as per OP. I was just saying I don't care whether non-aces agree or not. I don't like the implication about me, as an ace, that "sexual" contains & that should be more important than non-aces' opinion. Though, I mean, if we were to come up with a new word & they had a valid concern it could be discussed, but if their current label is problematic then good allies would be fine with re-opening the debate.

[nanogretchen4]

Are you okay with the term asexual? Because it is "a", meaning "not", and "sexual". I don't actually understand what is problematic about thinking "sexual" is the opposite of "asexual".

[Philip027]

Quote

I don't like the implication about me, as an ace, that "sexual" contains & that should be more important than non-aces' opinion.

If you're not even among the sexual crowd, there are no implications because the term doesn't even describe you.

 

Your "it's all about me" approach isn't exactly going to endear you to the sexual crowd, either.

[everywhere and nowhere]

I was trying to find my own post about the same issue a while ago, but I can't. To be honest, I prefer the word "allosexual". I too feel that "sexual" makes non-asexual people seem as if they were only motivated by sex. But maybe it's a purely asexual kind of prejudice towards that word... I also have another issue. I believe that my sex aversion makes me "at least effectively asexual", at least under the desire-based definition of asexuality (I may experience some form of sexual attraction, but never actually want to have sex). But I sometimes consider whether I could in fact be a sex-averse allosexual. (Which seems rather academic, because my choice is not to have sex anyway. And... what is usually described as "sex-averse allosexuality" doesn't sound like my experience, it's more about still experiencing desire and hence internal conflict - while in my case fear of sex is strong enough to completely suppress any potential desire.) But I would never say that "I may be a sex-averse sexual". No, saying "I'm sexual" by itself feels very distressing for me. Yes, this is a kind of linguistic taboo, but still I just can't do it.

 

As for "the French problem": according to what I've read, "allosexuel" was recognised as the official French equivalent of "queer".  In this case "allo-" would mean "differing from the norm", "differing from social expectations", and not "directed towards others". French has a more top-down approach to language and some kind of language council made that decision. Which, of course, poses a problem particularly for asexuals, and even more - bilingual French-English asexuals. In one language they "are" exactly what they "aren't" in the other...

 

However: remember that at least in some contexts, the simplest form of "non-asexual" or "not asexual" can be used...

[Philip027]

Non-asexual not only carries an awkward inherent double-negative, but also implies that asexuality is a norm when it's anything but.

[NickyTannock]

@TheMaria I opened a poll on this once,

 

 

[everywhere and nowhere]

3 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

but also implies that asexuality is a norm when it's anything but.

So what?

Desiring sex is normal.

Not desiring sex is normal.

And I don't really care what science says about it.

[Philip027]

Not desiring sex actually isn't normal, at least not how I define "normal".

 

To me, "normal" means "this is how the majority works; the standard", and the majority of people are not ace.

[Knight of Cydonia]

2 minutes ago, Nowhere Girl said:

So what?

Desiring sex is normal.

Not desiring sex is normal.

And I don't really care what science says about it.

I'd say asexuality isn't normal at all. To me being normal means conforming to a general average/pattern/trend, and likely only 1 in 100 people is asexual. There's nothing wrong with that though. Having purple eyes or being left-handed isn't normal, so what?

 

34 minutes ago, TheMaria said:

I don't like the implication about me, as an ace, that "sexual" contains & that should be more important than non-aces' opinion

I think that the 99% of the population that will actually be labeled with the term should have a pretty important opinion on the matter.

 

Given that the majority of sexual people on this site prefer the term "sexual" (based on past polls and general usage), I don't see the need for a different label.

[everywhere and nowhere]

But I will still only write "I may be a sex-averse allosexual". I don't feel sexual in any way.

[Knight of Cydonia]

23 minutes ago, Nowhere Girl said:

But I will still only write "I may be a sex-averse allosexual". I don't feel sexual in any way.

Use whatever term to describe yourself that makes you feel most comfortable.

 

But I don't think individual cases where the term "sexual" isn't fitting means we need a totally new term as a default. Otherwise, most non-asexual people would also speak out against the term "sexual", rather than have consensus that it's far more fitting than "allosexual". Again, no one is stopping you from calling yourself allosexual, and you should if it feels more right to you, but this thread is about what should be the general default term.

[anisotrophic]

Within AVEN I feel fine with "sexual".

 

Outside it, I feel awkward, like I'm going to make people uncomfortable. Well. Saying my partner is incapable of being sexually attracted to me is also a quick way to drop a turd into conversation. Can't really win here.

 

Allosexual means I'm hot for alligators right? Rar. 🐊

[Philip027]

No, it means you're hot for the allosaurus.

 

Check out that weird mini-squid thing on his face.  Isn't it dashing?

 

[nanogretchen4]

A size comparison between the allosaurus and humans suggests that allosexuals would find consummating their relationship logistically challenging and dangerous.

[Philip027]

Hey, if Skitty and Wailord could do it...

 

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Every non-ace I've met prefers sexual, so sexual it is.

[everywhere and nowhere]

6 hours ago, nanogretchen4 said:

A size comparison between the allosaurus and humans suggests that allosexuals would find consummating their relationship logistically challenging and dangerous.

How did dinosaurs have sex?

[Philip027]

Life finds a way, basically.

 

Except when a big ass meteor hits the planet or something.  Life can't do shit about that one.

[anisotrophic]

23 minutes ago, Nowhere Girl said:

How did dinosaurs have sex?

It's true! People are so human centric, bad assumption that other species are phallus bearers. The "birds and the bees" are really different from humans. Cloacal kissing. I said as much once when I saw a phallus added to a dino: to me it said a lot about the social construction of the human male as a default role in the world, to render a dino that way...