Are asexuals the "normal" ones?

[Andrei_Popescu]

Studies show that only about 1% of people are Ace. I wonder if those studies are really accurate. First of all the term "asexual" (used to describe a sexual orientation) is a relatively a new one and a lot of people don't even know what it means, so how would they describe themselves as such, when they don't know what it means? I have also seen a lot of articles about cases of marital rape and people complaining on forums that their partners no longer wish to have sex. So what's up with all those people no longer wanting sex, is it just some phase caused by stress, or some illness or is it the fact that they never liked sex in the first place and they just forced themselves to do it because "everyone else does it"? Of course people on the news and on forums are just the tip of the iceberg since a lot of people are ashamed to admit their sexual problems or report a rape especially marital rape. If the cause of this problem is lack of sexual interest (asexuality) then there are a lot more asexuals out there. Could they even be the majority?

[everywhere and nowhere]

No, while I strongly suspect that the real percentage of asexuals is higher than 1%, I don't think that asexuals are the majority. However, I also don't think of asexuality as something clearly delineated and a strict opposite of allosexuality. There is a spectrum of sexual attitudes and people may also move along this spectrum during their lifetimes. While there is clearly a difference between people who have lost all interest in sex and people who have never felt a desire for sex to begin with, I don't consider only inborn identities to be valid. Perhaps we should speak not so much of an asexual identity, but rather about experiences of asexuality. It's just that people who have, perhaps, become genuinely asexual at some point of their lives, usually don't identify as asexual.

And yes, I believe that there is a sizeable group of people who don't really desire sex, but only do it because it's considered normal. In fact, there are a lot of women who have never enjoyed sex. While enjoying sex and desiring sex are two different things, a person is unlikely to desire something they never enjoy (and to enjoy something they never really desired). Some of these women may be just victims of straight men's sexual incompetence, but some of them may be asexual without realising it.

How many asexuals are there? - quote from the text:

Quote

Alfred Kinsey, the founder of modern sexology, created his famous 1-6 “Kinsey Scale” of heterosexuality to homosexuality. He also included “Group X”, a group he found to have “no socio-sexual contacts or reactions.” (...)

14-19% of unmarried women! (Obviously, there’s a selection effect here – if you’re asexual-aromantic, you’re much less likely to get married.) I don’t know how much of the population at the time fell into the married/unmarried/previously-married categories. Also, the data is old, and Kinsey may not have distinguished romantic and sexual attraction.

That said, it’s safe to say that if Kinsey’s population was anywhere near representative, >1% of respondents fell into “category X”. If the “married” and “unmarried” people were each 25% of the total, we’re talking 5.5-7.8% of people in “Group X”.

 

[timewarp]

23 minutes ago, Andrei_Popescu said:

Studies show that only about 1% of people are Ace. I wonder if those studies are really accurate. First of all the term "asexual" (used to describe a sexual orientation) is a relatively a new one and a lot of people don't even know what it means, so how would they describe themselves as such, when they don't know what it means?

Well, the 1% figure is not based on self-identification as asexual. It's from a study by Bogaert and the question was about sexual attraction. About 1% identified with a statement that was something like "I have never been sexually atttracted to anybody". Please don't beat me up if I didn't get the wording 100% right, just look it up in the original publication.

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

No. People under the label “asexual” oftentimes don’t reproduce so it wouldn’t make any natural sense for us to be the majority. When you become older, you just lose sex drive and I’m pretty sure it has something with hormones

[Kersenne]

I agree with @Star Lion, looking at it from a purely biological perspective, we are made to be able to have sex, if only for a matter of reproduction. 

And from a biological perspective again, wanting to have sex is also necessary, because if nobody had a sexual drive, there probably wouldn't be humans left on earth. 

Humans are not having sex only for reproduction reasons anymore, and there are still more humans on Earth with a sexual drive than without one. 

So we'll remain (for now) the odd ones, but that's ok! We're awesome the way we are

[Stupsi]

22 minutes ago, Star Lion said:

People under the label “asexual” oftentimes don’t reproduce so it wouldn’t make any natural sense for us to be the majority. 

Do you want to imply here that it is possible to pass along a specific sexual orientation to your children or inherit it? 🤨🤔I mean, homosexuals do not reproduce either 

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

Just now, Stupsi said:

Do you want to imply here that it is possible to pass along a specific sexual orientation to your children or inherit it? 🤨🤔I mean, homosexuals do not reproduce either 

No, I’m saying that Earth and nature works in a way to where things work mostly in our favor. Having the majority of the population be ace isn’t in our favor. Also homosexuals still aren’t the majority. They’re not even the majority in the queer community because bisexuals make up about 50% of LGBTQ

[NickyTannock]

I take 'normal' in this case to mean a majority, but I thought it would be a good idea to post a reminder about elitism.

[NickyTannock]

I've always thought the real number was higher than 1%.
I think it's possible that many of the people answering the question about whether they experience Sexual Attraction may have assumed arousal is Sexual Attraction.

[maybeimamazed]

I think it's higher than 1%, but if a new survey were to be conducted I think the results would be overestimated. Simply because people misunderstand what asexuality is. It doesn't mean not liking sex. It doesn't mean being indifferent to sex. It doesn't mean being too tired to have sex.

 

[SithLord]

A species would not survive long if the majority were asexual or never desired sexual interactions. It would quickly develop into a sexual species because only the ones who had sex reproduced and continued the species, pushing the evolutionary trend towards favoring sexual desire/attraction.

 

Yes, I can acknowledge there's probably a higher percentage than 1% of the global population being asexual, but you would also need to explain what that means and limit it to recent changes or adjustments (as mentioned above, older people are known to have lower sex drives, so asking an aging population about their desire to engage in sex is not necessarily a good idea for universal application). 

 

I view sexuality and asexuality as it's own scale, and I don't view anyone as being "100% (allo)sexual" because I've never received evidence it exists. I would more acknowledge that people exist on a sliding scale with attraction as well as libido. A woman can be attracted to her husband but not want sex every time he does, hence marital rape. And yes, some people may be socialized into thinking sex is more important that it is, or that it's insanely important for early relationships but not so much for later in the relationship, so a lessening desire to have sex. It's not that asexual is the majority, just they're not exclusive boxes. 

[everywhere and nowhere]

26 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

I've always thought the real number was higher than 1%.
I think it's possible that many of the people answering the question about whether they experience Sexual Attraction may have assumed arousal is Sexual Attraction.

I agree. Similarly, people might confuse romantic attraction with sexual attraction. It happens often and our culture doesn't help people notice that they can be separated, in fact it conflates love with sex.

(I don't support sex without love, but I do support acknowledging love without sex as a legitimate option which should never be condescended by words such as "just friendship".)

8 minutes ago, brehasolo said:

I think it's higher than 1%, but if a new survey were to be conducted I think the results would be overestimated. Simply because people misunderstand what asexuality is. It doesn't mean not liking sex. It doesn't mean being indifferent to sex. It doesn't mean being too tired to have sex.

 

Why? Asexuality is still not so widely known for people to believe that being too tired for sex equals being asexual. And as for not liking sex - well, if a person doesn't like sex, they are unlikely to desire it, which would make them at least effectively asexual...

[Evren]

I think people are waiting longer to have sex nowadays (a usual side effect of good sex education) https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/18931-sex-education-delay-sex.html

 

But no I don't think asexuals are the majority. In fact I think that as sex becomes a personal choice with less stigma many people will have more sex. I've known several people who would prefer or preferred to have sex with lots of people but feel or felt very judged by their desire. 

 

 

[fuzzipueo]

2 hours ago, Stupsi said:

Do you want to imply here that it is possible to pass along a specific sexual orientation to your children or inherit it? 🤨🤔I mean, homosexuals do not reproduce either 

While there's no way to say one way or another that orientation can be passed down through families, as there's just not enough scientific data available (as far as I know), I would say that the likelihood of such passing on of such things is possible. As for your other statement - "homosexuals do not reproduce either" - err, where'd you come up with that idea? Gay men have been having children for generations (Oscar Wilde had two biological children, for instance).

[maybeimamazed]

1 hour ago, Nowhere Girl said:

And as for not liking sex - well, if a person doesn't like sex, they are unlikely to desire it, which would make them at least effectively asexual...

A person might have several bad experiences with sex (for a variety of reasons: they weren't relaxed enough, their partner didn't care about their well being, it was against their consent, etc) that might make them think "man, I'm really not into this...", but still have the drive/desire to do it.

[everywhere and nowhere]

2 hours ago, MichaelTannock said:

I take 'normal' in this case to mean a majority, but I thought it would be a good idea to post a reminder about elitism.

I disagree. Putting "normal" in quotation marks is a clear sign of distancing oneself from the judgemental use of this word.

[NickyTannock]

28 minutes ago, Nowhere Girl said:

I disagree. Putting "normal" in quotation marks is a clear sign of distancing oneself from the judgemental use of this word.

If they're distancing themselves from the judgemental usage, then they must mean the majority?

[maybeimamazed]

59 minutes ago, CBC said:

 In fact I think that those who truly are are a very tiny percentage. 

I wonder which percentage is both aro and ace (the "hardcore aces", if you will). I heard it's 25% of all aces. If 1% of the population is ace, then 0.25% is aroace.

[starweb]

I don't believe we are the 'norm' but I believe the percentage could be higher. I keep reading story after story of people like me, raised in a religious environment, told to save it until marriage,  and believe that everything will kick in after you met the right person. All during this time you see your friends struggling with abstinence and you are not, but you think nothing of it because maybe you're just morally superior or something. Then you meet the right person and you realize something is very wrong.  I've met a lot of people who are in this situation on this forum, and I suspect there are LOT more of us out there, they're just hidden, and confused.

 

But as for us being the 'norm', no. I have wondered about genetics.  I'm the product of an affair. My bio father was a Lothario (as were several men in his family, and some of the women were the female equivalent)  and apparently, my mother fell for his charms, temporarily at least. Why am I like I am?

[Andrei_Popescu]

6 hours ago, MichaelTannock said:

I take 'normal' in this case to mean a majority, but I thought it would be a good idea to post a reminder about elitism.

normal

adjective

adjective: normal

1. 1.

   conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.

    

   It seems like it means a majority doesn't it? My theory is that most people have sex (apart from reproductive reasons) because they are told they should, not because they actually like it. I also used it as a joke in response to people calling asexuals crazy, some even to the extent that they propose that asexuals should be cured by rape. If you find this elitism and can't take a joke, then I must be on the wrong forum. When I joined, I did it with the intention to show asexuals that there is nothing wrong with them and even point out some positive aspects of asexuality (like not confusing sexual attraction with love), but if I knew I was joining a SJW forum I never would have done it. I have always been a supporter of human rights and freedom of speech, which SJWs have nothing to do with - they only think they do. No offense but your comment just screams SJW and "blood thirsty" admin waiting to exert his power. So, good bye everyone!

[NickyTannock]

@Andrei_Popescu

 

When I said:

7 hours ago, MichaelTannock said:

I take 'normal' in this case to mean a majority

I'm saying that I know you're not using it in an elitist sense. (In other words, I get the joke)

 

And when I said:

7 hours ago, MichaelTannock said:

but I thought it would be a good idea to post a reminder about elitism.

I'm saying that I don't want to see elitist comments crop up. (So not directed at you, or anyone that has commented thus far)

[Andrei_Popescu]

30 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

@Andrei_Popescu

 

When I said:

I'm saying that I know you're not using it in an elitist sense. (In other words, I get the joke)

 

And when I said:

I'm saying that I don't want to see elitist comments crop up. (So not directed at you, or anyone that has commented thus far)

In that case it seems I have misjudged you. - You just worry too much. - Guess we have one thing in common I'm the type of person who always expects the worse in order to prevent things from being worse than I expected.

[Liana]

This seems similar to how I view the concept of sanity. In my opinion, nobody is truly sane, but what appears sane is merely people that share a similar insanity to them. In this version, asexuality is the default to asexuals, while it isn’t the default to those that aren’t asexual.

[Janus the Fox]

There haven't been a wide census on asexual prevalence, the Kingsley study if from 1991 that reported 1% of aces.  Now with Asexuality more known and visible, cant say for certain Asexuality is more or less than that study.  It could ve higher than LGBT prevalence... Nobody knows until some kind of census is done recently.

[Philip027]

Quote

First of all the term "asexual" (used to describe a sexual orientation) is a relatively a new one and a lot of people don't even know what it means, so how would they describe themselves as such, when they don't know what it means?

They don't need to know what it means because they still know they want sex, and therefore would never use "asexual" to describe themselves.

 

Quote

I have also seen a lot of articles about cases of marital rape and people complaining on forums that their partners no longer wish to have sex. So what's up with all those people no longer wanting sex, is it just some phase caused by stress, or some illness or is it the fact that they never liked sex in the first place and they just forced themselves to do it because "everyone else does it"?

Usually the former.  Also add "they've lost interest in their particular partner because they've found another one on the side" to that list.

[GlamRocker]

I instinctively feel that everyone must be asexual, or could be asexual, or WILL BE asexual... and are putting themselves through sex for the same reasons I did in my life, because they expect to start liking it eventually because everyone says it's so great. But that's an irrational feeling. My mind observes how consistently others pursue and report enjoying sex in real life. They show no signs of boredom, no signs of fatigue. I'm forced to conclude they operate fundamentally differently than I do, even though I can't understand what this difference really is. People say it's sexual attraction, but this is nebulous and silly to me, I'm attracted to people all the time, what's the difference? The only one I can see is that I don't have sexyfeelings Idonowannadothesex. I feel like there must be a lot of asexuals, because I didn't do anything special to feel the way I do. I didn't have a choice. If I didn't choose it, how can there be so many other people who this never happened to? It's coming for you. The asexuality gonna get you.

 

Like @Darth Plagueis the Wise said, I feel like asexuality is the default. The sexuals are weird, there can't be a lot of them, right?!