Jump to content

What being a sex favorable asexual means to me


gray-a girl

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, neverlove said:

This is only relevant if she needs to explain her sexuality to us. She does not, and therefore I question its relevance to the discussion.

Well sure she doesn't need to, but her explaining her sexuality was the point of her post, right? It's not an effective explanation if no one really understands what she's trying to say, and it's hard to understand without a clear definition of the key words she's using, or an explanation for why she appears to be choosing to define the word "sex" in a non-standard way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, neverlove said:

It is a double standard because she would have to show her knowledge of asexuality, it’s definition, and explain her own experience more precisely in order for people to believe she is asexual. It wouldn’t matter if she had the “default” orientation, but it seems you have to receive proper recognition to be on this side of the rainbow.

 

I honestly don’t understand her experience of asexuality, but I don’t understand any of the romantic identities either. Picking on her definition of sex is a way of challenging her sexuality.

The problem isn't in referring to intercourse as sex. The problem is in excluding non-intercourse sexual activities from sex. If your definition is based on the heterosexual "standard" that only intercourse counts as sex, then your definion is a way of challenging other sexualities.

 

edit: And I'd say it's a bit insensitive towards people who don't (for whatever reason) involve their genitals in sex.

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

What!? OP started a topic doing exactly that, voluntarily and unprompted -- "explain her sexuality to us."

 

Plus at the end throwing in some attitude about "arrogant asexuals" insisting on their own understanding of Asexuality that might somewhat differ from hers...

Pardon me, you are right.

 

She does not have to justify her sexuality to us. 

 

Her comment was directed at people who make judgements about her sexuality and wanted to post about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

When someone is basing their position on a questionable (or clearly erroneous) statement, yeah, that's gonna happen.

 

"I'm not gay; I just prefer to bang other dudes"

"I'm not in love with you; I'm just crushing on you/I just want to be around you all the time/I just put your needs over my own"

"I don't wanna have sex with other people, I just wanna have orgasms with them"

 

Again, this is called making a Distinction Without a Difference.  It's at the root of much of the "controversy" mentioned by the OP.

 

It's very much not an "accepted" definition, because that erases many people's (such as lesbians') sexual experiences that don't involve intercourse.  "Sex" is broader than that.

 

Let's be real here; all it is is just another way to try to say you want to screw other people without actually explicitly saying it (so that you can TECHNICALLY keep saying you're asexual).  Much like the whole "desires orgasming with other people" thing.  Can we call a spade a spade, here?  It's still sex.

 

I think it's the perfect place.  Again, this discussion (as you envision it to be, anyway) isn't meaningful without an understood, agreed-upon definition of what sex is in the first place.

Well, consider that it might be a distinction where we don’t understand the difference. To use your examples:

 

I like sleeping with men, but I don’t like labels.

 

I’m not in love with you, I have psychological issues that causes me to stalk you and if I get help this feeling will go away.

 

I don’t want to have sex with people, but I like talking dirty to people on the phone and masturbating with them.

 

“Intercourse” is one accepted definition for sex, it is not an exclusive definition. 

 

I do not think everyone has to agree on definitions in order for a conversation to be meaningful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, theV0ID said:

Well sure she doesn't need to, but her explaining her sexuality was the point of her post, right? It's not an effective explanation if no one really understands what she's trying to say, and it's hard to understand without a clear definition of the key words she's using, or an explanation for why she appears to be choosing to define the word "sex" in a non-standard way.

Good point. Although I think the point of her post was to have other sex favorable people post what being sex favorable means to them—I could be wrong.

 

I don’t think her definition for sex was non-standard (we all understood her right?), but it is not very inclusive.

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

The problem isn't in referring to intercourse as sex. The problem is in excluding non-intercourse sexual activities from sex. If your definition is based on the heterosexual "standard" that only intercourse counts as sex, then your definion is a way of challenging other sexualities.

 

edit: And I'd say it's a bit insensitive towards people who don't (for whatever reason) involve their genitals in sex.

I did not read any such intention in her words. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, neverlove said:

Good point. Although I think the point of her post was to have other sex favorable people post what being sex favorable means to them—I could be wrong.

 

I don’t think her definition for sex was non-standard (we all understood her right?), but it is not very inclusive.

Well if I'm understanding her correctly she's using the word "sex" only for penis-in-vagina sex, and that is definitely not the standard definition.

 

I'm reading her post as saying "I'm a sex-favourable asexual because I enjoy and want most sex but not PiV sex", and if so then by her definition a reasonably large portion of the population is now asexual. That's ridiculous (and basically saying that homosexual orientations don't exist) so I'm assuming I'm actually not understanding her at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, theV0ID said:

 

I'm reading her post as saying "I'm a sex-favourable asexual because I enjoy and want most sex but not PiV sex", and if so then by her definition a reasonably large portion of the population is now asexual. That's ridiculous (and basically saying that homosexual orientations don't exist) so I'm assuming I'm actually not understanding her at all.

Pretty much the same here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, theV0ID said:

I'm reading her post as saying "I'm a sex-favourable asexual because I enjoy and want most sex but not PiV sex"

I can’t speak for the OP, but I read this quite differently.

 

I can speak from my own experience, however. I think sex-favourable asexuals are often misunderstood. I do not experience sexual attraction; I may be attracted to people as strongly if not stronger than people of other orientations, it’s just in my case it never leads to the desire* to have sex.

 

The desire* to have sex, the way I see it, is some form of innate attraction/drive which, under the right circumstances, would lead to the desire to actually have partnered sexual intercourse of some sort (at least one person’s genitalia gets touched).

 

This is quite different from a desire to feel an orgasm. The desire to feel an orgasm, as I experience it, is unattached to another person (and certainly unattached to another’s genitalia). But that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy partnered orgasms; I can. When I feel other forms of attraction towards someone I can get the high of feeling romantic, aesthetic and sensual attraction + an orgasm. It’s admittedly amazing. But that doesn’t mean I experience sexual attraction. The act of partnered sex, in whatever shape it takes, still feels alien to me.

 

My intent with this post is not to argue with or invalidate anyone; I just wanted to try and explain the nuance of desire as I experience it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere

@Iam9man - and what you are describing is the difference between actual sex-favourable asexuality and the phenomenon best called "attraction without desire", which some people - in my opinion, erroneously - understand to be the same as "sex-favourable asexuality".

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are people that literally cannot become attracted to anybody, I know this because this was me, up until the age of 35 years, and even now my attraction is limited to my wife only

 

For me the lack of attraction equates to no libido or desire either. I need the attraction so that I can experience these things. Plus since my brain hemhorrage, I need my Nutritional Protocol etc

 

Now in my case, up until the age of 35 years I would have been accepted as an Asexual regardless of the definition used. But once the attraction arrived, at that point it really would have been inappropriate for me to call myself Asexual. This is why I dont. Now, I see myself as being part of the Greysexual Spectrum, Demisexual to be precise, since I can in specific circumstances and with an emotional bond I can experience attraction

 

For the folk that are identifying as Sex Favourable, these folk are not experiencing their sexuality in this way. What they are saying is they are not experiencing attraction, but at the same time they are not repulsed or indifferent. They are saying that sexual stuff are of interest for them and they see it in a positive light

 

I look back to the times when I was not attracted. I did not have libido or desire and so since I was not usually repulsed per se (I could get embarrassed) and I did not really enquire much about sex, beyond the normal average enquiry of, "What does that mean?", I would classify myself as indifferent. Even now, compared to most Allosexual folk, the way they think about sex so often, and actively seek it out, in comparison to them, I remain in the catagory of indifferent, even though I am now able to become attracted to my wife

 

I have already mentioned in other posts that my wife becomes easily repulsed, but I do not, so again in comparison to folk that become repulsed, I am indifferent

 

The folk identifying as Sex Favourable, are unlike either me or my wife. In their circumstances they are not becoming attracted, not generally repulsed, not generally indifferent, they are interested in sex. The lack of attraction in of itself is why they identify as Asexual. They do not identify as Grey because they have not crossed over, as I have done, into the realms of attraction. They do not know what that is like. They do not know what that feels like. But they do know that they are not repulsed, not indifferent and are interested in sexual stuff

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Iam9man Thank you for explaining the difference between wanting an orgasm and having a desire for partnered sex, that made perfect sense to me. :) 

 

The original post was not nearly as clear, however, so I still have a bunch of questions I'd like OP to answer :) 

2 hours ago, neverlove said:

(we all understood her right?)

Well, I didn't, which is why I asked for clarification. I am interested in learning about that what sex-favorable asexuality feels like, only problem is that I really do not understand her post as it is, so here come the questions.

 

My first post was just me trying to get the definitions out of the way so we would have a better chance of understanding each other, but if everyone agrees that in OP's post

sex = PiV      and

non-intercourse activities/sexual activity = all forms of partnered genital stimulation minus PiV

and gray-a girl hasn't given her own explanation of what she meant yet, then I guess I'll work from that assumption too. That is what those terms will mean in this post.

 

So the second thing I was curious to ask @gray-a girl is about this part:

 

6 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

But if my partner never wanted to have sex and instead just wanted me to orgasm or find sexual pleasure from non-intercourse activities ? I wouldn’t feel like I was missing anything, I’d be ok with that.

So if your partner was completely 100% utterly asexual, aka not down for any sex or non-intercourse sexual activity, would you feel like you were missing anything then? Would you be okay with that? Or would you have a desire/need to do those non-intercourse sexual activities? Would your desire for orgasms be fulfilled as long as you could take care of it yourself, solo?

 

I've looked for explanations of what sex-favorable asexuality is like before, a lot of times actually. Another sex-favorable ace explained it like this:

Sex is like cake. I don't actively crave cake. I never think about cake. I could live my life happily without ever having cake again. But if someone offers me cake, then I can enjoy it.

 

That analogy made sense to me. Is that also how you feel? Or do you dislike cake (PiV), but actively crave cupcakes (non-intercourse sexual activity), and would you be sad if you never got to have those again?

 

And a third question.

8 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

But then again since women can’t usually orgasm from just sex, even allosexual women, I’m sure I’m not alone in that

So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that most women can't orgasm from PiV alone (which, I've heard, is accurate), so they presumably prefer 'non-intercourse sexual activity,' just like you do. Right?

But you are also saying you are not allosexual because you don't feel any desire to have PiV sex, right? (Or is there something else that makes you ace, something you haven't mentioned in your post?)

But then you also say that these other women who prefer non-intercourse sexual activity are allosexual.

Something doesn't add up. What am I missing? Please explain this to me.

 

And a fourth question:

7 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

I have seen the phrase “has a desire for partnered sex” as describing sex favorable asexuals.

Where have you seen that?

I've not seen many people say that sex-favorable aces experience a desire for partnered sex, at least not on AVEN, but I'm sure the language aces use to describe things varies from place to place and platform to platform, so I'm curious as to where you got that. From AVEN? Tumblr? Twitter? Ace conference? A friend?

 

On AVEN, I've mostly seen people say two things about people who have a desire for partnered sex but no sexual attraction.

  • The first is that those people are cupiosexual, which I've seen described the same way @neverlove describes their orientation: hungry but nothing looks appetizing.
  • The second thing people say is that 'the definition of asexuality is 'no desire for partnered sex', so people who have that desire are by definition not asexual,' and I'm not taking a position on that statement in this post, just describing what I've heard, so please don't kill the messenger :).

Are those positions common in the place where you get your ace-related info from too? Or is that just AVEN talk?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Winged Whisperer
Just now, Laurann said:

I've looked for explanations of what sex-favorable asexuality is like before, a lot of times actually. Another sex-favorable ace explained it like this:

Sex is like cake. I don't actively crave cake. I never think about cake. I could live my life happily without ever having cake again. But if someone offers me cake, then I can enjoy it.

This is basically it really. And while I'm not sex favorable myself (as explained earlier because attitudes can easily shift depending on mood and circumstances), but I have had that favorable experience very rarely before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kind of curious then--what makes you define yourself as asexual? Not questioning validity, just your reasoning. And whatever you say is totally valid, just curious/trying to understand better. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus the Fox
22 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

To me it's the opposite: I experience attraction, but sex sounds terrifying.

So I experience attraction without any desire to actually have sex with anyone.

To me I experience neither and sex is neither satisfying or terrifying, even with a long term sexual partner  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

To state the topic of sex definition, there’s plenty of anti-LGBT communities that clearly state PiV sex as the ‘one true definition of sex’, there’s also a few LGBT that don’t and do consider having sex as PiV only.

 

All sex is just sex, however an individual defines it, having or not having sex never invalidates a persons Asexual or LGBT identity.

 

Ill keep away from this topic as it falls into invalidation themes to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2019 at 10:33 PM, sunbrella said:

I'm kind of curious then--what makes you define yourself as asexual? Not questioning validity, just your reasoning. And whatever you say is totally valid, just curious/trying to understand better. :)

Thank you for asking. To answer your question... I identify as part of the asexual umbrella because I can look at a completely naked body and never feel like “oh I’d hit that”. No interest. Clothed or unclothed actually. It’s not the person that turns me on.

 

If I didn’t have kinks, I’d probably be just as happy to masterbate and get it done that way. But one of my big kinks is liking to feel out of control... and that’s kind of hard to do by oneself. Also romantic partners often expect sex, so it all works out anyway. But you could have the most beautiful person in the world of any gender, and if they are not willing to do my kinks, I will have no sexual interest in them whatsoever. I’d be indifferent.

 

And actually, I think defining Asexuality as a lack of a desire for sex and only that can be problematic. Some people have diagnosable anxiety over sexual activity, and because it’s a disorder if they got treatment for it, it would go away. Which makes it not an orientation. But the anxiety is so bad for them that it’s at a phobic level so they don’t even want to consider that it’s something they can deal with and overcome, so they identify as asexual. To me, if such a person felt sexual attraction to a gender or genders, but had really strong anxiety about having sex, then they fall into that category.

 

For gay people for example, it’s not what you do, it’s who you find attractive. It’s “what kind of person turns you on”. Same for Asexuality. If a gay woman had a man physically stimulate her, for example, I’m pretty sure she would orgasm too. 

 

I have come to the conclusion that many of the people who attack sex favorable asexuals actually have some form of an anxiety disorder and find it easier to identify as asexual then to deal with and overcome it. Which is why they attack my identity, because my identity seriously disrupts their facade. If a person can like sexual activity (if you want to define that as sex that’s fine it doesn’t matter) then the people with anxiety feel threatened because they do have sexual attraction and the only thing they are hinging their asexual identity on is the lack of (or in this case the phobia of) sex. 

 

If a person’s heart is beating fast, they feel nauseous or want to vomit, or get scared (there is such a thing as a non fearful panic attack, but you need to have the other anxiety symptoms. it’s probably repressed fear though) all of these things are signs of anxiety that can be treated and essentially cured. Sometimes in some cases the anxiety can be so bad that it even squashes sexual attraction, but the difference is for these people, they can get treatment for this and then overcome it. And if they truly are asexual they still won’t have sexual attraction, but it’s also possible that sexual attraction may come back.

 

I do not have that problem. I do enjoy sexual activity and if you want to define playing with toys with another person as sex... I think that’s a bit broad but you can define it that way if you want to.

 

In my OP I can say that I intended sex to mean “PiV” as well as any type of oral sex, as well as Pi butt”. All of those things to me count as sex. Having your partner put a vibrator on you, to me is not sex. Not sure I would count having them play with you using their fingers as sex either. But regardless of the definition it doesn’t matter. Sex favorable asexuals are real, even if some people feel threatened by us.

 

After all of this discussion, the irony is that my libido is seriously low right now. I’m not even sure I can get it back. It’s making me somewhat indifferent and annoyed about sexual activity, and missing the days when I had a libido. I’ll probably keep trying to get it back though. Just not sure if it’s possible yet. But that, that is hypoactive sexual desire disorder because I used to have a libido.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, gray-a girl said:

For gay people for example, it’s not what you do, it’s who you find attractive.

The desire definition isn't about what you do, it's about what you want to do. If a guy said he was not attracted to men, but wanted to have sex with them really badly, then regardless of whether he actually has sex with men, wouldn't that make him at least a little gay?

 

If you did mean to include cunnilingus in your definition of sex, then what is this sentence about? 

On 10/8/2019 at 1:34 PM, gray-a girl said:

women can’t usually orgasm from just sex, even allosexual women, I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

As far as I know, admittedly not from experience, cunnilingus is pretty effective.

 

47 minutes ago, gray-a girl said:

I have come to the conclusion that many of the people who attack sex favorable asexuals actually have some form of an anxiety disorder and find it easier to identify as asexual then to deal with and overcome it. Which is why they attack my identity, because my identity seriously disrupts their facade. If a person can like sexual activity (if you want to define that as sex that’s fine it doesn’t matter) then the people with anxiety feel threatened because they do have sexual attraction and the only thing they are hinging their asexual identity on is the lack of (or in this case the phobia of) sex. 

"I have come to the conclusion," how? Are you a licensed psychologist authorized to diagnose mental health issues? Do you know all sex-repulsed aces? No?

It's interesting that you're doing the exact same thing that you claim 'arrogant asexuals' do, invalidating and dictating their experience. I'm sorry, but this comes across as incredibly rude at the very least, as well as possibly against the ToS. You are essentially telling a large number of people on this forum, 'You're not actually asexual, you're just mentally ill and lying to yourself.'

Just. What. 

 

Also, it's not sex-favorable asexuality that people on this thread took issue with. Notice @Iam9man explanation of how he experiences his, as well as the whole cake analogy. Nobody took digs at those. People took issue with what they perceived to be a very narrow definition of sex (which turned out to be intended a little less narrowly, but you weren't here to clarify), thinking that you did actively desire things that are still sex, but that you just don't consider sex. If the definition of sex you were using was 'PiV', then that would make all gay people asexual, which is obviously ridiculous. So people taking issue with that is very fair. We weren't knocking sex-favorable asexuality. Did you see anyone say that sex-favorable aces don't exist?

You can't just wave away all criticism you get with 'You guys are just arrogant and mentally ill, so I don't need to listen to you."

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gray-a girl said:

I have come to the conclusion that many of the people who attack sex favorable asexuals actually have some form of an anxiety disorder and find it easier to identify as asexual then to deal with and overcome it. Which is why they attack my identity, because my identity seriously disrupts their facade. If a person can like sexual activity (if you want to define that as sex that’s fine it doesn’t matter) then the people with anxiety feel threatened because they do have sexual attraction and the only thing they are hinging their asexual identity on is the lack of (or in this case the phobia of) sex. 

 

If a person’s heart is beating fast, they feel nauseous or want to vomit, or get scared (there is such a thing as a non fearful panic attack, but you need to have the other anxiety symptoms. it’s probably repressed fear though) all of these things are signs of anxiety that can be treated and essentially cured. Sometimes in some cases the anxiety can be so bad that it even squashes sexual attraction, but the difference is for these people, they can get treatment for this and then overcome it. And if they truly are asexual they still won’t have sexual attraction, but it’s also possible that sexual attraction may come back.

Wow. That's some fucked up things to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There really are a lot of sexual people out there who truly and entirely find beyond their grasp the fact that there exist some people who simply experience no attraction or innate desire for partnered sexual activity (some might call them asexual).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess I got sick of people invalidating my Asexuality, and actually someone did call me sexual on here so I got it again.

 

And actually I never pointed anyone out so I never actually invalidated anyone. All I said was “these things are anxiety symptoms” which they are. But a phobia of sex is a real thing, and phobias can be treated. They can also sometimes kill your sexual attraction as well. It doesn’t mean a person isn’t also asexual, once the anxiety is treated, but the point of my whole argument is that you cannot base your entire definition of Asexuality on not liking sex when there are people, (whether they want to call themselves asexual or not) who have a treatable anxiety disorder that is the cause of them not liking sex.

 

Let’s say we have person a) who does not identify as asexual. They have sexual attraction, and they recognize they have a phobia of sex. They get treated and they no longer have the phobia. Then you have person b), who has sexual attraction to people as well, and they also have a phobia of sex so don’t want it. But to further complicate matters, they’ve found a nice way to avoid their phobia- just identify as asexual. What’s the difference between person a and person b? The only difference is one is accepting of their phobia and the other isn’t. One uses Asexuality to mask their phobia while the other doesn’t. Both can be treated and if person b is treated they can not have the phobia. They may find afterwards that they are still asexual, or they might not.

 

In psychology the way it works is simple: there are criteria that you check off, and if you have x number of specific symptoms, you have a disorder. Racing heart beat, vomiting, and fear are all known anxiety symptoms. These check off the list. I can even look up the symptoms for this disorder, and sorry but if you meet them you have the disorder that’s how it works. It’s not my choice it’s just the way it works. That’s how the DSM works and that’s how psychologists and psychiatrists diagnosis disorders. The key thing the thing that changes everything- is that a phobia like this can be treated.

 

Actually it’s up to anyone reading this to decide if they have an anxiety disorder or not. I’m pretty sure that a lot of people identifying as asexual and sex repulsed (a lot but not all) will meet the criteria but, it’s not really my decision to make. Also let me add, I’m not saying all sex repulsed asexuals have this phobia. If you are just mildly grossed out by sex but don’t have symptoms like racing heart beat or vomiting or faintness or fear, then you probably don’t have the phobia. 

 

However, If there are people who have this anxiety disorder and they don’t want to admit it to themselves because they feel safer identifying as asexual, then that is their choice. If they want to limit themselves because of their anxiety and phobia, if they want to be in denial about it, and they are avoiding it so much that they’d rather identify as asexual then deal with the phobia? Then again, I’m not going to call any specific people out on that (unless they attack my asexuality). But what I am saying is a real thing, and it really explains why I’ve experienced SO MUCH invalidation on this website.

 

Again identify as you want. Even if it means cheating yourself it’s your choice.  (And I’m not using the word you to refer to any specific person on here. I’m just using the term generically). Just don’t go using your criteria (by saying asexuals can have sexual attraction as long as they don’t want sex) to judge other people’s asexuality, because there are many many allosexual people who don’t want sex because of this phobia.

 

 

And I do know a lot about psychology actually. I’ve studied it quite extensively.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

you cannot base your entire definition of Asexuality on not liking sex

Good thing nobody here is doing that, then.

 

They're basing it on whether you desire/pursue sex.  Which makes sense, as that's what sexual people do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous

It's the innate desire for partnered sex.

 

All the therapy and phobia-curing in the world won't restore your desire if it was never there to begin with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
6 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

Let’s say we have person a) who does not identify as asexual. They have sexual attraction, and they recognize they have a phobia of sex. They get treated and they no longer have the phobia. Then you have person b), who has sexual attraction to people as well, and they also have a phobia of sex so don’t want it. But to further complicate matters, they’ve found a nice way to avoid their phobia- just identify as asexual. What’s the difference between person a and person b? The only difference is one is accepting of their phobia and the other isn’t. One uses Asexuality to mask their phobia while the other doesn’t. Both can be treated and if person b is treated they can not have the phobia. They may find afterwards that they are still asexual, or they might not.

Why can't you recognise that such a person may not even want to be "cured"? That they may be fine with not experiencing sexual desire?

Yes, I find the idea of having sex terrifying. I don't want to call it a "phobia" because it's a word meant to medicalise such an experience - and for me it's not a mental health issue, it's an integral part of my inner life. But I just don't want to "treat" it. I don't want a potential future in which I would have sex to exist. I don't want to torture myself with attempts to "desensitise" myself to sex and nudity - these things are so deeply terrifying to me that trying to overcome my aversion would mean huge discomfort. I just don't want it. I have no desire, no need to be capable of having sex. Ultimately, I just don't see an ability to have sex as something valuable to me. Trying to overcome my aversion would mean extreme discomfort in the name of something I don't even need.

A life which includes sex and sexual desire isn't inhrently better than one which doesn't. And it's really up to the individual to decide what they want to experience. For me it's simple - an accepted sex aversion is not pathological. Because sex isn't Inherently Wonderful (nor is it inherently horrible). Both actual sex and the thoughtfeelings associated with possibility of having sex may be very different for different people - and some people just don't have a predisposition to find sex something wonderful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@gray-a girl, bafflingly you seem to be under the impression that anxiety is a disorder, in and of itself? Which would be... stupid. Anxiety, as anyone who "knows a lot about psychology” (lol) would know, is a perfectly normal emotion, and everyone (sane) experiences it as a natural, appropriate and sensible reaction to certain situations throughout their life. Now, like most human emotions, anxiety can become disordered, of course, but mixing up anxiety and anxiety disorders like that is just inane.

 

What you’re saying is basically, it’s fine to be “asexual” but not wanting sex, well, that would be just a bridge too far. And god forbid being anxious at the notion of unwanted sex, that would be sick and in obvious need of a cure!

 

Of course this pathologizing of asexual experiences is anything but original. It’s Culture of Compulsory Sexuality 101, and it’s actually one of the more fundamental raisons d’être for asexual visibility and education.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@gray-a girl Have you considered that one doesn't need to have an anxiety disorder (which I'm assuming is what you meant by anxiety in your post) to be distressed by (or have a phobia of, as you call it) unwanted sex? Think of an allosexual person who wants sex with some people but not others. If someone, they didn't want to have sex with tried to have sex with them, that would be rape and reacting with fear towards that would be perfectly reasonable and not indicative of an anxiety disorder at all. So for an asexual person, who doesn't want to have sex with anyone ever (whether they are repulsed or not), all possible sex would be with someone they don't want to have sex with and therefore rape (I'm not saying aces can't consent to sex, just that even if you're not repulsed it's possible to see no reason to ever do so). And therefore reacting with fear to the thought of yourself having sex i.e. being raped would still be perfectly reasonable and not an anxiety disorder. 

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

@gray-a girl, bafflingly you seem to be under the impression that anxiety is a disorder, in and of itself? Which would be... stupid. Anxiety, as anyone who "knows a lot about psychology” (lol) would know, is a perfectly normal emotion, and everyone (sane) experiences it as a natural, appropriate and sensible reaction to certain situations throughout their life. Now, like most human emotions, anxiety can become disordered, of course, but mixing up anxiety and anxiety disorders like that is just inane.

 

What you’re saying is basically, it’s fine to be “asexual” but not wanting sex, well, that would be just a bridge too far. And god forbid being anxious at the notion of unwanted sex, that would be sick and in obvious need of a cure!

 

Of course this pathologizing of asexual experiences is anything but original. It’s Culture of Compulsory Sexuality 101, and it’s actually one of the more fundamental raisons d’être for asexual visibility and education.

Actually, you are right, anxiety is a normal part of everyday experience. However, there are specific phobic symptoms that are so extreme that they count as a disorder. 

 

The following are panic symptoms that someone gets when they encounter their phobia:

 

  • sweating
  • trembling
  • hot flushes or chills
  • shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
  • a choking sensation
  • rapid heartbeat (tachycardia)
  • pain or tightness in the chest
  • a sensation of butterflies in the stomach
  • nausea
  • headaches and dizziness
  • feeling faint
  • numbness or pins and needles
  • dry mouth
  • a need to go to the toilet
  • ringing in your ears
  • confusion or disorientation

The following are the psycholoigical symptoms, but they don't necessarily have to be present for it to be a phobia. They just usually are:

 

  • fear of losing control
  • fear of fainting
  • feelings of dread
  • fear of dying

 

You don't need to have all of these to have a phobia, but the more of them you have the more of a phobia it is. And by the way, these symptoms have nothing to do with asexuality, sex, etc. In the symptom list, it doesn't specify what you are phobic of. But if you experience these symptoms related to any specific thing, it counts as a phobia. This is because these symptoms are extreme and beyond normal levels of anxiety.

 

 

7 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

Why can't you recognise that such a person may not even want to be "cured"? That they may be fine with not experiencing sexual desire?

Yes, I find the idea of having sex terrifying. I don't want to call it a "phobia" because it's a word meant to medicalise such an experience - and for me it's not a mental health issue, it's an integral part of my inner life. But I just don't want to "treat" it. I don't want a potential future in which I would have sex to exist. I don't want to torture myself with attempts to "desensitise" myself to sex and nudity - these things are so deeply terrifying to me that trying to overcome my aversion would mean huge discomfort. I just don't want it. I have no desire, no need to be capable of having sex. Ultimately, I just don't see an ability to have sex as something valuable to me. Trying to overcome my aversion would mean extreme discomfort in the name of something I don't even need.

A life which includes sex and sexual desire isn't inhrently better than one which doesn't. And it's really up to the individual to decide what they want to experience. For me it's simple - an accepted sex aversion is not pathological. Because sex isn't Inherently Wonderful (nor is it inherently horrible). Both actual sex and the thoughtfeelings associated with possibility of having sex may be very different for different people - and some people just don't have a predisposition to find sex something wonderful.

If you don't want to be cured, then that's fine, its your choice. But it doesn't mean its not a phobia, you even admit it's terrifying. And yes, to overcome a phobia there is always discomfort, that is normal. It is also normal to do everything you can to avoid that which you're phobic about, so identifying as asexual could be a means of avoidance. But if you have no desire to get over your phobia, and you are ok with the decreased and limited number of people that will be in a relationship with you without sex (or if you are aromantic and don't want to be in a relationship at all) then you might find it useful to identify as asexual. If the sexual attraction piece is missing, its also possible that even if the phobia were treated it would still be missing, too. Which, would make getting over the phobia not that worth it, especially if you end up being indifferent to sex. (Though again, you can't know for sure if its affecting your sexual attraction unless its treated). But, you can't lie to yourself and say its not a phobia, if you meet the symptoms. (Well you can do that too but its your choice). However if you go to any doctor, and even if you forget to identify WHAT it is you feel these symptoms about (or tell the doctor you don't want to tell them) they will still diagnosis this as a phobia. So it's not pathologizing an orientation, like how homosexuality used to be pathologized, because you will get the phobic diagnosis regardless of what it is you are feeling these symptoms about. Even so as  I said, if you don't want to deal with it and you'd rather identify as asexual thats your choice. It's possible you may be missing out on something wonderful, but at the same time it is possible that treating it will make no difference and you don't feel like its worth it to find out. But don't also go around forcing other people out of the asexual identity just because you don't like sex and someone like me does. I do not experience sexual attraction to people, and it has really really caused me problems. This can never be treated, as far as I am aware, unlike a phobia which can be.

 

 

1 hour ago, Dodoa said:

@gray-a girl Have you considered that one doesn't need to have an anxiety disorder (which I'm assuming is what you meant by anxiety in your post) to be distressed by (or have a phobia of, as you call it) unwanted sex? Think of an allosexual person who wants sex with some people but not others. If someone, they didn't want to have sex with tried to have sex with them, that would be rape and reacting with fear towards that would be perfectly reasonable and not indicative of an anxiety disorder at all. So for an asexual person, who doesn't want to have sex with anyone ever (whether they are repulsed or not), all possible sex would be with someone they don't want to have sex with and therefore rape (I'm not saying aces can't consent to sex, just that even if you're not repulsed it's possible to see no reason to ever do so). And therefore reacting with fear to the thought of yourself having sex i.e. being raped would still be perfectly reasonable and not an anxiety disorder. 

Actually, by definition, a phobia IS an anxiety disorder. Thats what it is. Of course, if someone they didn't want to have sex with them raped them, they'd have anxiety and yes that is normal, of course it is. If they said no sex to someone, and they felt a little anxious that the person might not listen to them and rape them, thats not necessarily a disorder either, especially if the above symptoms are missing and its more of a worry (rather than an extreme amount of fear). But that is not what I am talking about. Some people get these symptoms simply from the thought of, or depictions of, sex. Some people feel far more than regular anxiety over sex. And the symptoms are extreme, as listed above. Mild anxiety without things like a racing heart beat or a certain number of the above symptoms, are of course not a disorder.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

Well I guess I got sick of people invalidating my Asexuality, and actually someone did call me sexual on here so I got it again.

 

And actually I never pointed anyone out so I never actually invalidated anyone. All I said was “these things are anxiety symptoms” which they are. But a phobia of sex is a real thing, and phobias can be treated. They can also sometimes kill your sexual attraction as well. It doesn’t mean a person isn’t also asexual, once the anxiety is treated, but the point of my whole argument is that you cannot base your entire definition of Asexuality on not liking sex when there are people, (whether they want to call themselves asexual or not) who have a treatable anxiety disorder that is the cause of them not liking sex.

 

Let’s say we have person a) who does not identify as asexual. They have sexual attraction, and they recognize they have a phobia of sex. They get treated and they no longer have the phobia. Then you have person b), who has sexual attraction to people as well, and they also have a phobia of sex so don’t want it. But to further complicate matters, they’ve found a nice way to avoid their phobia- just identify as asexual. What’s the difference between person a and person b? The only difference is one is accepting of their phobia and the other isn’t. One uses Asexuality to mask their phobia while the other doesn’t. Both can be treated and if person b is treated they can not have the phobia. They may find afterwards that they are still asexual, or they might not.

 

In psychology the way it works is simple: there are criteria that you check off, and if you have x number of specific symptoms, you have a disorder. Racing heart beat, vomiting, and fear are all known anxiety symptoms. These check off the list. I can even look up the symptoms for this disorder, and sorry but if you meet them you have the disorder that’s how it works. It’s not my choice it’s just the way it works. That’s how the DSM works and that’s how psychologists and psychiatrists diagnosis disorders. The key thing the thing that changes everything- is that a phobia like this can be treated.

 

Actually it’s up to anyone reading this to decide if they have an anxiety disorder or not. I’m pretty sure that a lot of people identifying as asexual and sex repulsed (a lot but not all) will meet the criteria but, it’s not really my decision to make. Also let me add, I’m not saying all sex repulsed asexuals have this phobia. If you are just mildly grossed out by sex but don’t have symptoms like racing heart beat or vomiting or faintness or fear, then you probably don’t have the phobia. 

 

However, If there are people who have this anxiety disorder and they don’t want to admit it to themselves because they feel safer identifying as asexual, then that is their choice. If they want to limit themselves because of their anxiety and phobia, if they want to be in denial about it, and they are avoiding it so much that they’d rather identify as asexual then deal with the phobia? Then again, I’m not going to call any specific people out on that (unless they attack my asexuality). But what I am saying is a real thing, and it really explains why I’ve experienced SO MUCH invalidation on this website.

 

Again identify as you want. Even if it means cheating yourself it’s your choice.  (And I’m not using the word you to refer to any specific person on here. I’m just using the term generically). Just don’t go using your criteria (by saying asexuals can have sexual attraction as long as they don’t want sex) to judge other people’s asexuality, because there are many many allosexual people who don’t want sex because of this phobia.

 

 

And I do know a lot about psychology actually. I’ve studied it quite extensively.

just lol

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@gray-a girl I hate to be the one to tell you Santa ain't real, but... sex has no value to anyone but sexual people. The fact that you think the sex repulsed should "work on it" because they're "missing out on the magic that is sex!" proves you're sexual. Because you VALUE SEX.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

@gray-a girl I also don't know why you don't seem to want identify as a sexual person. Sexual people are cool. The only reason I don't identify as a sexual person is because no matter how much I feel like I have in common with sexual people, I know that I don't desire sexual connections and so will reject all of them. Sexual people aren't like that. It is a significant difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Um... that's a big NO from me on this post.

 

OP.... Your lack of understanding of how sex-repulsed asexuals operate is very... um... astonishing and not in a good way.

 

The only time, an asexual needs to work/lessen on their sex-repulsion is when the mere mention of the word "sex" makes it difficult for them to do simple things like school, university, work or whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...