Jump to content

"You Don’t Need a Sexual Identity to Enjoy Sex"


Homer

Recommended Posts

Quote

Consider these five patients I’ve seen in the last 60 days:

 

“I’m straight, but I enjoy gay fantasies, especially when I’m about to orgasm. So does that mean I’m bisexual?”

 

“I am so hot for this new guy in my building, but I’m confused. I dislike his politics and his attitudes about pets. I identify as sapio-sexual, so how could I be hot for someone I don’t respect?”

 

“I’m pretty sure I’m gay, but I don’t want to live the gay lifestyle. Does that mean I’m a different kind of gay?”

Marty Klein Ph.D.  https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/sexual-intelligence/201909/you-don-t-need-sexual-identity-enjoy-sex

 

 

This was a refreshing read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very refreshing indeed, though as a demi-gay dude I wouldn't mind having sex with a woman I'm close to. I don't really experience sexual attraction much anyways so why would it matter, sex is sex. *Shrugs*

Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved it.

I don’t get involved in all the definition battles, because as my profile says I’m labeless. 

 

But it if I were to suddenly get involved in the discussions, I’m not sure I could ever say it better. I may not 100% agree with 100% of the article, but I would feel comfortable copy/pasting the article as representing my thoughts and opinions on the subjects the article covers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't stick to labels + Belonging to a community is comfy but don't feel entitled = No nonsense.

Even though the author speaks lightly of some labels, which I don't fully support.

Link to post
Share on other sites
RoseGoesToYale
Quote

"The problem is that they all feel trapped by a sexual identity that they’ve chosen or feel stuck with."

"sexual identity seems to be more about identity than about sexuality."

"Identity labels should describe us rather than limit us."

Dude, it's all a trap. Don't get caught up in it. Do what you like, like what you do. I don't have to be a ceramist to make pottery. I don't have to be a programmer to write code for this TRS-80 PC-II. I'm a Lightning fan, I can enjoy watching the Canes or the Hawks or the Jets or the Leafs.

 

You're put on this earth for 60, 80, 100 years. Why waste any of 'em arguing over who fits where? Sexuality is just one big giant lifelong experiment anyway. Explore. Enjoy. Don't do anything you don't wanna do. Life's too short to take it all so seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, GhostGoesToWail said:

The problem is that they all feel trapped by a sexual identity that they’ve chosen or feel stuck with."

quote in a quote from the article...

 

anyway,  I personally disagree with the stuck thing. figuring out what my sexuality is, rather than uncertainty and confusion, has freed me from baggage, from guilt, from feelings of obligation and inadequacy,  from being alienated to finding out I'm human after all... I feel more free knowing it's part of my nature and my choice to say no, or yes, and it's much more honest and rewarding when I decide to share physical affection with a clear idea of the roles we choose to play and that it's not required.  a traditional marriage,  the nuclear family, us what had me feel stuck. Finding that there's a "label", that asexuality existed was a relief.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ConsideringDisplayName

I'm going to to agree with Nima Kat here.  I think some labels are useful in their ability to help like minded people find each other, identify with each other, then share and build a community with each other.  While I agree with definition of self as a fluid thing, not applying labels because we could be trapped by them or worse because someone else doesn't want to hear about them feels a bit like erasure to me.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if a label you're using really doesn't work for you, just drop it. Drop labels if none work for you!

 

Do NOT take on a label that means something else and claim to be that thing because it'll only mess you up in the long run with confusion and stress about trying to adhere to that identity when you know it doesn't fit you, and you have people telling you "uuum no, that's not gay" or whatever which will just mess with your head in the long run.

 

That's a huge problem here in the ace community with people trying to twist themselves into identities that don't actually match their experience, then getting tangled in knots over it all and that leads to stress and depression and heated debates as well. A label isn't worth that much shit especially when the label doesn't actually fit your experience Y_Y

 

Just frikken drop labels if no one label works exactly for you. That's why I just ID as 'celibate sexual' (when I HAVE to ID as anything). I'm not homosexual, not hetero, not really bi, also not exactly pan (I would prob qualify as pan romantic though). I'm also kind of sapio and kind of demi and kind of ace.. but none of those things enough to ID as any of them. So fuck it. Life got a LOT easier when I just dropped it all and said "oh yeah I'm just some kind of sexual person who doesn't place much importance on sex". Damn, that was a huge weight off the old shoulders when I just dropped the need to adhere to a specific label.

 

(Edit: if a label fits you perfectly though I agree with others than it can be very useful to have it! But when nothing works, forcing yourself into ones that don't match your experience will only lead to stress and confusion in the long run!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of identity politics. That basically we feel so loyal/attached to a label we've chosen, that we stick to that label and what it means even though it's us trying to shove ourselves in boxes not really designed to fit most people. Yes, some feel trapped by labels and the assumptions/stereotypes attached to them, and that's why I understand those who don't like labels. Personally, I find labels nice because I know I don't trap myself in them. I see it all as a spectrum and if this shoe doesn't fit, there's another one that might somewhere and why give myself blisters because of a bad shoe? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere

I largely agree with a lot of the things said in this article. However, one passage is really unpleasant and out of synch with the author's general open-mindedness:

Quote

They have invested so much in their sexual identity—for example, “demisexual,” an unnecessary new substitute for the word “human”—that if you don’t make that the centerpiece of who they are, you can be accused of being demi-phobic, or ace-phobic (because in an amazing twist of identity-driven logic, so-called asexuals claim demisexuals as being on their continuum).

This is obvious invalidation, on at least three levels:

1. The all-too-familiar claim that "demisexuality is normal sexuality, you don't need a word for that!". I agree with one thing: that likely a lot of people could be considered demisexual, but they have never thought of themselves that way and don't identify as such. Yes, that's plausible. But it's also obvious that not all people are demisexual: on the one end, those who may feel sexually attracted to people they hardly know aren't demisexual, on the other end, strictly asexual people aren't demisexual...

2. OK, I'm not going to bar people from discussing whether asexuality is a spectrum or just the endpoint of another spectrum. I'm still going to argue that ultra-low levels of sexual attraction are still "virtually zero" and - first of all - that keeping people who have felt a bit of sexual desire at some point in their lives from identifying as asexual is mostly harmful to them. People may need the asexual label also as a means of saying "I'm not sexually available". However, differing opinions are still obviously allowed.

Instead, Klein just tries to ridicule the whole concept of asexual continuum... And it's not just about asexuals - demisexuals themselves typically want to be a part of the asexual community because they themselves feel that they have a lot in common with asexuals.

3. And the phrase "so-called asexuals"... for me it's questioning asexuality. Haven't we already agreed that it exists?

Really, how can I trust sexologists? Can't they even be expected to accept the agency and legitimacy of people who don't fit into the most narrow version of sex-positive ideology?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg, @Nowhere Girl, I totally missed that when I was skimming through it. That's pretty offensive. Even just to choose our orientation to shit on as opposed to ones that are recognized by society, that was a choice to bash on labels but not ones more people would actually care about. Especially demisexuality. The whole reason there's a spectrum debate at all is because people may relate more to asexuals because of how low they are on the sexuality spectrum. 

 

No bashing of the straight dude who likes to make out with guys. No reference to bisexuality as a continuum. Nothing about the identity problms or "No True Scotsman" fallacies that cause wars in the LGBT+ community. No, the author chose our community. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nowhere Girl said:

The all-too-familiar claim that "demisexuality is normal sexuality, you don't need a word for that!". I agree with one thing: that likely a lot of people could be considered demisexual, but they have never thought of themselves that way and don't identify as such. Yes, that's plausible. But it's also obvious that not all people are demisexual: on the one end, those who may feel sexually attracted to people they hardly know aren't demisexual, on the other end, strictly asexual people aren't demisexual...

The way it's most commonly defined though, the vast majority of people really are demisexual. We seem to define it differently on AVEN (I guess because a lot of people like to claim it's a kind of asexuality?) but the way a lot of people define it is just "I need some kind of bond before I can actually want sex with a person". That's possibly the only way the person making that quote had ever heard it defined, hence the confusion!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nima Kat said:

quote in a quote from the article...

 

anyway,  I personally disagree with the stuck thing. figuring out what my sexuality is, rather than uncertainty and confusion, has freed me from baggage, from guilt, from feelings of obligation and inadequacy,  from being alienated to finding out I'm human after all... I feel more free knowing it's part of my nature and my choice to say no, or yes, and it's much more honest and rewarding when I decide to share physical affection with a clear idea of the roles we choose to play and that it's not required.  a traditional marriage,  the nuclear family, us what had me feel stuck. Finding that there's a "label", that asexuality existed was a relief.

I agree with what you're saying but I'm sure the first time you learned about the label asexuality, didn't stop just  there! I bet you have read a LOT of definitions, explanations, etc. U didn't stick with the label only. The whole process of learning what is BEHIND that label was the thing that set u "free". Actually that was that lead you to be more confident in saying and believing I.e. ""I don't want actually to have sex. Yes! I don't want. That's why I was confused all these years. Society religion media friends relatives and friends have done a brain wash to you but.....thankfully, identity doesn't change. Feelings about sexual attraction are unchangeable. I don't need sex to lead a happy fulfilling life. That was what was missing""

 

I don't stick with labels. I agree in most with the article. I am what I am.

Link to post
Share on other sites
InDefenseOfPOMO

Postmodern theorists are vilified for saying many of the same things that are being applauded in this thread, it seems to me.

 

There must be some reason for such a double standard.

 

Maybe it is because so many of them are French. Maybe their mistake was not saying things like "There is nothing outside of the text". Maybe their mistake was not rejecting the label "French".

 

Next time try "Senior Fellow at (insert a U.S. think tank)", or something like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This article by a sex therapist isn't specifically about asexuality, but does mention it and demisexuality too. It's getting a very angry reaction on twitter but personally I think it's mostly pretty on point, aside from being  a bit dismissive in certain places.


Source: Psychology Today
Title: You Don’t Need a Sexual Identity to Enjoy Sex
Date: 30/09/2019
Link: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/sexual-intelligence/201909/you-don-t-need-sexual-identity-enjoy-sex

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was interesting, but what does it have to do with psychology?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Galactic Turtle
Quote

Identity labels should describe us rather than limit us. They should fit us, rather than us fitting them. They should just be a convenient shorthand for our experience and self-perception. Otherwise, when people feel obligated to feel or behave in certain ways to be “loyal” to their identity, they’re undermining themselves.

This x 10000000.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, crazy ace said:

I thought it was interesting, but what does it have to do with psychology?

Well... psychology is the study of the mind and behaviour... and the article is to do with the mind and behaviour 🤷‍♀️

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere

It is dismissive of asexuality and (perhaps even more) demisexuality. Check out mine and @SithGirl's responses in this topic (it's about the same article):

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd... But I'm terrible at thinking for myself when I say an opinion and it gets dismissed so good on you, Dr Dude.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chris_Kappa said:

I agree with what you're saying but I'm sure the first time you learned about the label asexuality, didn't stop just  there! I bet you have read a LOT of definitions, explanations, etc. U didn't stick with the label only. The whole process of learning what is BEHIND that label was the thing that set u "free". Actually that was that lead you to be more confident in saying and believing I.e. ""I don't want actually to have sex. Yes! I don't want. That's why I was confused all these years. Society religion media friends relatives and friends have done a brain wash to you but.....thankfully, identity doesn't change. Feelings about sexual attraction are unchangeable. I don't need sex to lead a happy fulfilling life. That was what was missing""

 

I don't stick with labels. I agree in most with the article. I am what I am.

Can't speak for the person you quoted, but for me, I never had a problem saying that. I was basically content to run around just saying "not interested" in so many ways until someone asked me if I was ace [which I initially denied because I didn't recognize it as a sexuality]. For me, seeing the label and reading its definition was more like "huh. so there is a word that describes my experience. What do you know. Cool." I didn't feel any different afterwards, I just realized there was an actual term for not being into sex/dating. I checked out some other definitions over time out of curiosity because people here sling the terms around a lot and I wanted to understand, but basically I already just knew asexual fit me and my experience as soon as I read the initial definition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a fairly decent article, and to an extent, I can agree with it, but this

" If, for example, you’ve never had sexual feelings for anyone (nothing wrong with that), and one day you decide you’re “asexual,” you don’t suddenly get to judge people who accept you but don’t believe there’s such a sexual orientation as “asexual.” "

People judge other people everyday for just about every reason, from the way they dress, to the way they speak, so why can't a person judge another who doesn't believe asexuality is a thing? Now, maybe I could be more understanding if it was instead that a person hops between identities like crazy and one day, out of the blue, just says they're ace, and the person they tell is skeptical about it because of how often the person changes identities, but still accept the identity hopper as a friend and human being. Like.. okay, that might have a point to it. If there's a pattern of behavior where they're changing multiple times a year, then.... it makes every new claim that much less believable.

However, if someone doesn't hop around, and especially if they're the type to think things over very thoroughly before committing to something, and doubly so when they stick with that identity for years..... maybe there's something to that identity that's worth checking out. Maybe it's not just some made up identity for special brownie points. By not accepting when someone says they're ace simply because you don't believe asexuality is a legitimate orientation, it's basically saying "I don't trust your ability to properly identify yourself because I think it's all rubbish and regardless of how much research I've put into it, my opinion matters more to me than the possibility that there might be something new to sexuality that I don't know about." lolololol

If someone is spewing some stupid shit, and they don't acknowledge that they aren't speaking from a place of thorough understanding, acting like their opinion is more accurate than the growing pile of scientific studies backing up asexuality, even having it observable in animals.... then yeah, I say it's justifiable to judge 'em. We judge Flat Earthers, we judge Evolution deniers, we judge Anti-vaxxers, and lord knows who all else, who decide to throw science out the window because in their opinion, they just don't believe it. I see no difference between that and judging someone who doesn't believe asexuality is a real thing. xP

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with a lot of the article since it reflects how I have always acted towards labels. Use the label if it provides comfort, but you define the label not the reverse. Honestly that was the general impression I always got from the community here. That said the tone is incredibly combative and dismissive especially towards the end. I don't want to speak for him, but he seems personally offended by the concepts of asexuality and demisexuality.

 

Also I feel he isn't seeing the forest through the trees here. I feel there needs to be a bigger conversation on community. I can safely say that within my lifetime what "community" means has changed and continues to do so. I am speaking purely as a layman, but a lot the traditional notions of community have become weaker (if not out right broken). With newer notions, that are usually supported by modern technology, forming in their absence. This trend seems to hold truer for younger generations especially. I also find it funny when older generations complain about it. It is like a parent complaining to a child that they have too many toys, the environment they have is the directly caused by your actions. So maybe instead of attacking people for the act, perhaps you could investigate why the act is happening in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My main problem is this:

" If, for example, you’ve never had sexual feelings for anyone (nothing wrong with that), and one day you decide you’re “asexual,” you don’t suddenly get to judge people who accept you but don’t believe there’s such a sexual orientation as “asexual.”

 

I never just "one day decided [I was] 'asexual' " I have NEVER identified as straight, gay or bi. I ALWAYS described myself as "or", "none of the above" or "opposite of bi" when I was asked what I was before I knew there was a term for asexuality. And once I found the term, I didn't just immediately sink into it; I took my time, first calling it nonsexual until I realized that asexual basically means that, too, with the prefix a- meaning "not" or "without" [so not sexual, without sexuality]. That was almost 9 years ago now and it's the only sexual orientation that ever made sense to apply to me. The author is treating this as some flippant choice. I can admit, I can imagine there being people who would identify with it to seem cooler, people have done it with bisexual in the past, but acting as if that's the only/primary reason people identify as ace is like 200w.gif Excuse me?

If you're gonna speak like you're so high and mighty, Mister Know-It-All without actually having checked out the research that backs it up, acting like you're speaking from some place of authority on the subject, then you bet your sweet ass I'm gonna judge you. If he's made it his profession to know about sex and sexuality, then the burden is on him to do his due diligence and explore the subject earnestly and see what the science has to say on the subject. It's literally his job to understand this stuff, so brushing it off is like him dragging his ass on stocking the shelves because he'd rather be texting his friend. If he was just some guy, then there wouldn't be as big a burden on him, laymen don't typically get around to coming in contact with newly developing ideas, but this shit is LITERALLY his fucking job. lmao.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Questions of identification are especially important to young people, whose appropriate mission in life is identity formation. These questions are also important to people in the political arena, who want to influence others’ attitudes or behavior.

Different people pursue the question of identity in different ways. These include choice of consumer goods like cars or fashion; preferences in music and art; how (and whether) they vote; and what news media they depend on."

 

" So what is a bisexual? A pansexual? An asexual? A heterosexual? These things mean whatever someone says they mean. You have a right to your definition. And no one is obligated to agree with your definition. No one is obligated to identify their preferred pronouns just because you’ve decided that as a trangender, you need everyone to do that so you feel validated. "

 

Honestly, this article reads like a thinly veiled political piece on "how political correctness & social justice ruined everything". Except people are still getting murdered over their sexual orientation or gender identity. We haven't moved forward to the place where, as the author claims, you can enjoy yourself all you want if you happen not to be straight.

 

Labels are used not only for defining yourself, they are also used to protect minorities from persecution and intolerance. And in that legal context it's very important to not to play word games with their meaning.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Identifying as asexual has been freeing for me. Before, I was still me and had figured out what was going on with me, but I had the sense that no one else would ever understand my experience or even believe I exist in the way that I do! That I would ALWAYS be treated as if I have feelings I don't have and would have to play along. After all, I've been experiencing this for many, MANY years.

 

Now that the asexual identity exists, I feel connected to other people in a way that I thought would be IMPOSSIBLE before. I'm not out in real life because I know there will be more negatives for me than positives. But sharing my experience with other asexuals has made a difference in my feelings of alienation. And believe you me, if I wake up tomorrow and suddenly GET ALL THE SEX STUFF, I won't be perturbed in the LEAST. I'll just go have some sex, please and thank you.

 

And I will say, "Guess I really was a late bloomer, who'd have thought after 37 years?!" Any label I accept serves ME, NOT the other way around. I'm pretty sure that's how it works with most people. THEY ADOPT A LABEL TO SERVE THEM. If it no longer serves, well, ta ta baby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I used to call myself 'heterosexual with a very low libido' for a long time because I didn't even know about asexuality. There was next to no information available when I was growing up. Unsurprisingly, this led to a lot of confusion and unhapiness at that time. Trying to explain that away with "heterosexuality means whatever you say it means" is not helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Karret I find it weird that the author is telling people they're not allowed to judge, it's not up to them to tell people what they can and can't do. But personally I think that if someone is doing something to other people that they hate having done to them, that they are being childish and stooping to the same level as the people who did it to them. Also, not everyone is judgmental.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given how many people are (as per the UN definition) intersex, ergo cannot have heterosexual or homosexual sex by the same definition, I'd agree. It's down to the individuals and what they put in as to what they get out

Besides, who's tried boffing a label? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...