Naeblis Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 Have any of you guys had your testosterone levels checked bya doctor?? Itold my Dr that I was an asexual 5 or 6 months ago and he just laughed at me. When Iinsisted, he said he'd check my "T" levels and they came back very low. He said that he could put me on therapy and that I wasn't an asexual and that such a thign didn't exist. He said it was a disability not a state of being. He said it would be like people with no legs claiming that they hated walking. Link to post Share on other sites
Elf people Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 I guess this topic applies to the ladies as well. I had mistakenly assumed that it was estrogen that spurred female sexuality but a friend pointed me to research on the subject and it turns out that it is an increase in testesterone that increases desire for both sexes. Of course that is not to say that there isn't a huge difference in the overall levels but it is the relative increase that is the key. So perhaps there is an absence of testesterone for the asexual ladies-or at least a weak negative correlation between the level of test and the degree of asexuality (since that is surely not the only variable contributing to asexuality and is likely to have its causal impact attenuated-it might be more significant for males though). Link to post Share on other sites
Live R Perfect Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 Ah... welcome back Naeblis I guess that low testosterone levels could have a bearing on some people's lack of sexual desire, but I think that the important thing to consider is whether you are happy being asexual (and as far as I and several hundered other people here are concerned, it DOES exist). If you are truly unhappy living without sexual attraction then by all means go for the hormone therapy... and then please let us know if it works for you. Link to post Share on other sites
-------------------------- Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 I think there might be a biological root for my asexuality. I've never had it checked, but I think my testosterone must be low. I've recently tried growing a beard for the first time, and it took me over 2 months just to get it to a point where it was noticeable. I also have very low body hair - that's probably a sign too. The doctors probably have a hormonal supplement that could turn me into an omnisexual horndog, but uh... no thanks. Link to post Share on other sites
----------- Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 For me I don't believe it's a testosterone problem. I'm horny ALL the time, I can grow facial hair, my voice is pretty low (kinda... I'm a baritone), I'm fairly tallish, all that stuff. It's just that, well, you know... genetailia is repulsive and sensations are uncomfortable for me XD. I dunno, it could be in some... Link to post Share on other sites
bard of aven Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 I ain't no doctor or nothing, but I suspect the big T has more to do with arousal than attraction. Sorta what I think DrumUltima was getting at. Being asexual around here, at least, does not necessarily mean you don't become aroused, tho for many that seems to be the case. It means, among other things, that should you become aroused, you don't experience a desire to do anything about it that involves another person being present to assist. So my guess is testerone levels are unrelated to a lack of sexual attrction to others. But I ain't not doctor or nothing. boa Link to post Share on other sites
JKReagan99 Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 *T* may have something to do with it, but so what? My DNA says I have brown hair, that doesn't mean that it isn't a part of me He said it was a disability not a state of being.Disability...umm NO. I can do anything I want to,and on top of that I'm not distracted by sex, nor am I at risk for STDs/STIs. I don't really consider that a disability, considering I think I'm better off being a. As I am asexual, I also do consider that my *state of being,* though the word *state* seems to sugges that it can change and does change, which it doesn't.... Link to post Share on other sites
Naeblis Posted December 15, 2003 Author Share Posted December 15, 2003 Disability...umm NO. I can do anything I want to,and on top of that I'm not distracted by sex, nor am I at risk for STDs/STIs. I don't really consider that a disability, considering I think I'm better off being a. As I am asexual, I also do consider that my *state of being,* though the word *state* seems to sugges that it can change and does change, which it doesn't I told the Dr something similar. He said mentally unbalanced people never think they're mentally unbalanced. That's part of the sickness. I'm starting to wonder if he's right. What's our PURPOSE?? I believe in evolution. What is the evolutionary PURPOSE of an asexual?? It flies against everything. Link to post Share on other sites
JKReagan99 Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 Disability...umm NO. I can do anything I want to,and on top of that I'm not distracted by sex, nor am I at risk for STDs/STIs. I don't really consider that a disability, considering I think I'm better off being a. As I am asexual, I also do consider that my *state of being,* though the word *state* seems to sugges that it can change and does change, which it doesn't I told the Dr something similar. He said mentally unbalanced people never think they're mentally unbalanced. That's part of the sickness. I'm starting to wonder if he's right. What's our PURPOSE?? I believe in evolution. What is the evolutionary PURPOSE of an asexual?? It flies against everything. Then your doctor is being an idiot. Everyone is different, and yes that does mean chemical levels in different people are different, that doesn't make a person better than another. And there are people who are unbalanced and can recognize they have a problem, as they have trouble functioning. I strongly believe in evolution as well, but you got something really wrong about it. Evolution does not mean that any difference someone has is beneficial to reproduction. So we don't reproduce, that doesn't mean we can't exist. Homosexuals, like asexuals, also don't reproduce(in most cases), but they aren't considered as being mentally unbalanced, the APA did take homosexuality off the list a while ago. Both groups do naturally occur, evolution has nothing to do with it.Also, something is only a problem if it's causing damage. asexuality is doing no damage to me nor anyone else I know who come in contact with me. In fact, it puts me at an advantage, as I don't have to deal with the negative side effects of sexual relations, and I can get intimacy in other ways that are more fufilling and loger lasting than sex can provide. Link to post Share on other sites
Naeblis Posted December 15, 2003 Author Share Posted December 15, 2003 But there are negative side effects to everything. There are negative side effects to having friends. Would it be right to cut ourselves off from people because it mayprotect us? Link to post Share on other sites
Eta Carinae Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 I told the Dr something similar. He said mentally unbalanced people never think they're mentally unbalanced. That's part of the sickness. What a fucking load of shit. I have clinical depression and believe me, I know. I'm starting to wonder if he's right. What's our PURPOSE?? I believe in evolution. What is the evolutionary PURPOSE of an asexual?? It flies against everything. Well, what's the evolutionary purpose of a homosexual? They don't produce offspring, and yet they show up in many species. Link to post Share on other sites
JKReagan99 Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 But there are negative side effects to everything. There are negative side effects to having friends. Would it be right to cut ourselves off from people because it mayprotect us?Of course there are negative side effects to everything. That doesn't mean that I should go out and do things that also have positive side effects. Drugs can be great stress relievers and can make you feel good(good effects), but they also can kill you or make you real sick(bad effect), I'm not about to go out and do them though. Concerning sex, I'm not saying that everyone should stop, because some people are born sexual, and that is part of who they are. Just because it is good for them, doesn't mean it is for everyone, nor does it mean that is should be good for everyone. I am better off without sex. Not everyone is better off, some people need sex to make intimate connections with others, I don't. I am happy for who I am, and I think anyone who trys to mess that up is crazy and stupid. Now, also note that celibacy is often looked highly on. So not having sex has been seen as a good and healthy thing, but, according to your doctor, only if you constantly want sex, so that you are actually denying yourself something you want (this would actually cause unhappiness/stress in most people, so it really isn't healthy for most people in my opinion) Concerning friendships: I am drawn towards friendships, so denying myself would go against my nature. If I wasn't drawn towards friendships, yeah I wouldn't have to deal with some of the downsides, so I would be better off, but that's not the case for me as I am drawn to friendships, just as I am NOT drawn to sex. That doesn't mean that I should cut off friendships. Link to post Share on other sites
Naeblis Posted December 15, 2003 Author Share Posted December 15, 2003 Thank you for your answer. I appreciate the honesty. Link to post Share on other sites
Live R Perfect Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 On the subject of evolution, it is not a process with a particular purpose. When organisms reproduce their DNA is combined and there is a certain proportion of randomness that occurs in the process. This creates genetic diversity in the world. Evolution occurs when organisms with certain genes are more suited to surviving in their particular environment than others. This has been referred to as 'survival of the fittest'. Evolution doesn't steer the development of a species, it is the species' environment that does that. So there may well be no PURPOSE behind the existence of asexuality, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. IF asexuals have a common genetic link, then this might well mean that (if we did not live in the complex technologically advanced society we do) we would be wiped out (ie. our genes would not be passed on). As it is there are other ways of having children without the 'conception boogie' as Julie calls it (love that phrase!). Link to post Share on other sites
Zorui Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 I have incredible lacks of testosterone-caused stuffs, and i'm damn happy. Oh, and that doctor needs to die. Link to post Share on other sites
JKReagan99 Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 IF asexuals have a common genetic link, then this might well mean that (if we did not live in the complex technologically advanced society we do) we would be wiped out (ie. our genes would not be passed on). As it is there are other ways of having children without the 'conception boogie' as Julie calls it (love that phrase!).Even if we do have a genetic link, that doesn't gaurentee that we would die off and the gene would be lost. If the gene(s) are recessive, they could be passed on without being manifest in a person. Also, it could be a result of a number of genes coming together, which normally don't act together. I like to think of it as in part caused be society/socilization as well (still NOT a choice though), so there is more to the story than just biology... Link to post Share on other sites
Live R Perfect Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 Oh, I completely agree with you there, JKR If it was purely genetic then we'd all be telling the same stories. As it is we have all had different experiences and have slightly differing perceptions on what asexuality is. Link to post Share on other sites
Zorui Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 What is the evolutionary PURPOSE of an asexual?? It flies against everything. Population control. Link to post Share on other sites
Gorax Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 Everything has a purpose. I beleive in evolution, too, but I still think there has to be a bit of creation in there somewhere. I don't know what that purpose is, but it has one. Until I know, though, I'll say it's population control :P I also think that doctor is full of shit, but . . . Whatever floats your boat. Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 Who says we need a purpose? We may be creatures of entropy. And I'd be okay with that. :) Link to post Share on other sites
AVENguy Posted December 17, 2003 Share Posted December 17, 2003 MMMMmmmmmMMMM........ entropy..... Seriously, evolutionary dynamics are way way more complicated than most people can imagine. Think about the ways that ecosystems are dynamic, interrelated and constantly. Evolving to be a better predator could wipe your species out if it allows you to kill off the local food supply, it's not all about making more babies with sharper teeth. Also, as alot of the research I've done shows, equating "sex," "hormones" and "reproduction" is highly problematic. Feel free to expand upon or critique these definitions... Sexuality- a socially constructed category of activities often linked to a particular set of physiological symptoms (blood flow to the genitals, quickened heartrate, etc.) This category first emerged around the turn of the century, but has changed considerably since then, and manifests differently in different parts of the world. Hormones- chemicals secreted into the bloodstream which involve different parts of the body to "communicate" without the use of the neural network. Some of these chemicals can, among other things, generate the physiological symptoms associated with sexuality (see above.) Reproduction- the biologically and socially complex process by which new members of a species (and, if we're talking about people, a society) are produced. Often a short section of this process involves activity which is categorized as "sexual" (in the form of heteroreproductive intercourse, though in the case of in-vetro fertalization it does not). The vast majority of this process, however, consists of carrying, nurturing (emotionally and nutritionally), and socializing an offspring. Link to post Share on other sites
anythingtestdead Posted December 17, 2003 Share Posted December 17, 2003 what perpose do asexuals have to evolution??????--------evolution isnt just about sex............you dont have to reproduce to help everything to evolve................what about people who are sexual and never reproduce?????? we(all human sexual or not) all contribute to everything and everyone's evolution..................... nobody can help it......We are all FEEDING THE MACHINE no matter what........ just by breathing.......just by pissing........throwing a rock......behing alive.....useing a papertowell.... FEED THE MACHINE :twisted: ........nobody has a choice anyway..... Link to post Share on other sites
gambit_boi Posted December 17, 2003 Share Posted December 17, 2003 *adores agent smith* combining fear of emotionless suits and agressive assholes in one. brilliant. Link to post Share on other sites
Incisivis Posted December 17, 2003 Share Posted December 17, 2003 Agreed, agreed, and agreed. Too many people seem to confuse being different from the norm with something that's actually problematic/harmful. I'm not going to bother with finding a biological basis for my asexuality anytime soon, because I'm happy with it. :) Link to post Share on other sites
ApolloSeek Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 Naeblis and others: Evolution is a random process. Therefore ascribing any overarching purpose to it is specious. There can be biological reasons for asexuality being adaptive. Overpopulation is one of them. Furthermore, humans are not subject to biological evolution like other organisms. An example of this is medicine. When humans encounter a pathogen, we use technological means to defeat it instead of letting susceptiable indivduals die. Not other known animal on Earth does this. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.