How Did "Asexuality Is a Spectrum" become Dominant?

[Skipper Valvoline]

I've noticed more and more in the last couple years that most ace educational videos/posts/articles/etc. all push the "asexuality is a spectrum" narrative, which fascinates (and admittedly bothers) me because a few years ago that wasn't mainstream. 

 

I went digging through the AVEN archives and it seems this idea really hit its stride in early 2018. Before that there were only a handful of posts mentioning or debating if it was a spectrum. But once 2018 comes around it's suddenly EVERYWHERE and terms like 'aspec' pop into use. But what was the source? Why did this happen? Does anyone know?

 

I'm deeply curious because it's also my understanding that not all aces agree with this. Many still think it's better to clarify that sexuality is a spectrum of which asexuality is one end. Personally, I have concerns about saying "it's a spectrum!" all the time. I think it makes us look particularly snow-flakey, I think it waters down the meaning of being ace, and that it creates unnecessary confusion over what should be a straightforward explanation. I know AVEN can get dragged into semantic debates and whatnot, and so it is not my intention to spark another one with this post. I simply want to know how the "it's a spectrum" conversation became mainstream when it seems it's still hotly debated.

 

Anyone have any clues?

[AshenPhoenix]

What do you mean when you say "asexuality is a spectrum". As a concept? Because the idea that sexuality is a sliding scale and spectrum that has full sexuality on one end, and asexuality on the other, is much, much older than 2018

[Knight of Cydonia]

I'm not sure, but I've never liked the terminology.

 

Sexuality being a spectrum, sure, I can get behind that. And I can accept that it's rounded out by a grey area near the end. But asexuality should be considered the 0 point, the null - a total LACK of desire for sex. Not a spectrum.

[Ashmedai]

I even remember hearing about since when I joined way back when in 2014, so it's not exactly that new.

[Skipper Valvoline]

2 minutes ago, AshenPhoenix said:

What do you mean when you say "asexuality is a spectrum". As a concept? Because the idea that sexuality is a sliding scale and spectrum that has full sexuality on one end, and asexuality on the other, is much, much older than 2018

You're absolutely right. What I'm referring to is the idea that asexuality itself is a spectrum. This seems relatively new.

[FaerieFate]

I think asexual spectrum is like... these asexual side of the sexual spectrum. Because while grey-a and deming are technically sexual, they're part of the asexual community because they relate to asexuals more than sexuals. 

 

Ya know?

[Skipper Valvoline]

1 minute ago, Una Salus Victus said:

I even remember hearing about since when I joined way back when in 2014, so it's not exactly that new.

It's not, but its sheer popularity is new. There's about 12 posts saying "asexuality is a spectrum" on AVEN before 2018, but 3 and a half PAGES for all the times it's referenced since. I don't know what kick-started it.

[AshenPhoenix]

5 minutes ago, Skipper Valvoline said:

You're absolutely right. What I'm referring to is the idea that asexuality itself is a spectrum. This seems relatively new.

Like, as in. People saying they are asexual but still experience sexual attraction? Would that not be gray-asexuality? Many graces identify as part of the asexual community and spectrum since they are still part of a minority that experiences very rare sexual attraction (and I believe our official definition for asexuality was, if not still is "A person who experiences little or no sexual attraction).

 

That's cool. I mean as long as we're not trying to get rid of the idea of gray-asexuality since that has a LOT of stuff in it. If someone wants to say "I experience sexual attraction so little that I don't even want to identify as grace" that's... Kinda fair. It's easier than having to go "Well, I'm grace but really I only kinda probably feel attraction to maybe.... One woman a year, but it usually lasts like. A week." I say I'm gay even though I'm technically bisexual for the same reason (mostly attracted to guys, ways easier than going on a spiel about it).

 

Again, I don't know specific examples or anything, so this is just my general statement, I could have a totally different opinion if this is about something totally unlike what I'm thinking.

[Knight of Cydonia]

I consider grey-sexuality to be the low/very low end of the sexual spectrum.

 

That doesn't mean that they can't be part of the asexual community or find support here, of course. I just can't see asexuality as anything but the null point on the scale.

[Skipper Valvoline]

I think it did start as a way of incorporating aces, grays and demis altogether (because you know, general shared experiences) but it seems that increasingly it's being opened even further into "aces can physically have sex and be in relationships and enjoy sex and still desire partners etc. etc." which... frankly seems to be getting away from the point, though. I feel like it wouldn't be unusual, before long, for people to ask "so, are you one of those aces who likes sex/relationships?" which should make about as much sense as "so, are you one of those gay guys who likes women?"

 

Maybe I'm freaking out over nothing, though. Maybe it's not as bad as it seems. I've just been frustrated lately that I don't see many counterpoints in the mainstream.

 

(Though so far this thread has been very refreshing, thank you!)

[AshenPhoenix]

 

16 minutes ago, Skipper Valvoline said:

I think it did start as a way of incorporating aces, grays and demis altogether (because you know, general shared experiences) but it seems that increasingly it's being opened even further into "aces can physically have sex and be in relationships and enjoy sex and still desire partners etc. etc." which... frankly seems to be getting away from the point, though. I feel like it wouldn't be unusual, before long, for people to ask "so, are you one of those aces who likes sex/relationships?" which should make about as much sense as "so, are you one of those gay guys who likes women?"

 

Maybe I'm freaking out over nothing, though. Maybe it's not as bad as it seems. I've just been frustrated lately that I don't see many counterpoints in the mainstream.

 

(Though so far this thread has been very refreshing, thank you!)

 

Sexuality is pretty fluid, it's not very black and white. Most people who refer to themselves as one label rarely ever fit into that label perfectly. There have been a multitude of studies that show it is exceedingly rare for someone to be 100% hetero or homosexual. But most of the population will identify as heterosexual because none of their homosexual urges are ever strong enough to really act upon, or be a major part in their lives. Labels are there to help people describe themselves and explore themselves, not for others to slap onto them. Personally. As long as someone doesn't feel sexual attraction or feels it so completely and utterly rarely that it absolutely has no impact on their life. Whatever, identify the way you want.

 

Also, yeah, the idea of aces who like sex, are in relationships, etc. is much older than 2018. Like, it's been going on since I at least joined. Back in ugh... checks profile. Jeez, 2012. Sexual attraction is different than romantic attraction, or physical capability. Singling out people based on either of these things isn't fun for those people. If a gay man were to have sex with a woman, he probably wouldn't have a bad time, nerve endings are still there. And I mean, the relationship thing is true. Romantic orientation is different than sexual orientation.

 

Sexual attraction is different than physical sensation and romantic capabilities. God knows I haven't wanted to be in a relationship with every person I've slept with.

[FaerieFate]

2 minutes ago, Skipper Valvoline said:

I think it did start as a way of incorporating aces, grays and demis altogether (because you know, general shared experiences) but it seems that increasingly it's being opened even further into "aces can physically have sex and be in relationships and enjoy sex and still desire partners etc. etc." which... frankly seems to be getting away from the point, though. I feel like it wouldn't be unusual, before long, for people to ask "so, are you one of those aces who likes sex/relationships?" which should make about as much sense as "so, are you one of those gay guys who likes women?"

 

Maybe I'm freaking out over nothing, though. Maybe it's not as bad as it seems. I've just been frustrated lately that I don't see many counterpoints in the mainstream.

I'm asexual. I have a high libido. I masturbate. I watch porn. I write and read erotica. If I had a romantic partner I'd be sexually active both to make them happy and because it helps my migraines. 

 

But I'm asexual. I don't experience sexual attraction. I have no desire to have sex. Any sex I DO have isn't for the sex itself, but other reasons. Ya know? 

 

And just because I'm asexual doesn't mean the plumbing doesn't work. Ya know? Like, people can get off from things that's not arousing to them because that's just how the human body reacts to stimulation. 

 

That's not to say all asexuals are like me. Asexuals whose plumbing doesn't work are valid. Asexuals that are sex repulsed are valid. Asexuals that are happiest in a relationship that doesn't include sex are valid. That's all okay too.

 

But, there's a spectrum there. I'm just as asexual as a sex- repulsed asexual that'll never have sex and are happiest pretending it doesn't exist. But we're not the same.

 

2 minutes ago, Skipper Valvoline said:

(Though so far this thread has been very refreshing, thank you!)

Sometimes this is a heated topic. Beware. 

[Karst]

I think it's at least partly a response to very prescriptive definitions of what it means to be gay/straight/asexual.  The "spectrum" idea has its flaws, but I think it's better than trying to sort every aspect of people's desires and behaviours into neat little boxes.

[Snao Cone]

It's the word "spectrum" that everyone wants to hump. It's a buzzword and it's increasingly making my twitch. And it also feeds the eagerness some people have to call themselves something other than what they are, just to feel more unique. It's a non-answer to give somebody when they ask "I like my partner for reasons other than their body, so I'm sort of asexual, right?" because people don't want to be bothered to get wrapped up in that kind of discussion.

[Someone Else]

Some aces like kissing, some due to erogenous zones can feel pleasure from sex even though they aren't specifically attracted to anyone, some like to make out, some can see physical  attraction.  Others are the opposite.  That sounds like a spectrum to me.  Just a lot of people who can only see one side and therefore deny the existence and validity of any other way of feeling -- now that's annoying;   "I'm ace, I don't like kissing, therefore no ace can.  NO SPECTRUM ALLOWED!" 
Sometimes I wonder why I am still here.  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Skipper Valvoline said:

. I feel like it wouldn't be unusual, before long, for people to ask "so, are you one of those aces who likes sex/relationships?" which should make about as much sense as "so, are you one of those gay guys who likes women?"

 

 

I mean... honestly, isn't that already kinda a thing? When I ID'd as ace and was trying to find other aces to date, I found it extremely difficult to find anyone that didn't want sex to be part of the relationship (and quite honestly, I recommend any asexual to ask about this before dating another ace). A "sex free asexual" was what I ended up looking for... which seemed like a needle in a haystack. I got "asexual - well, actually cupiosexual but it's on the spectrum so I just say ace" and "asexual... well, really sapiosexual, but it's on the spectrum so I just say ace", etc, etc. People ranged from wanting sex once per month to several times per week. Several aces profiles I had looked at had things on it like "I've tried dating other asexuals and none of them are actually asexual, so just don't message me if you want to date. Looking for friends only." I ended up resorting to dating sexuals on the online dating sites, because I literally couldn't find an asexual that wasn't also seeking sex from me and at that point, why bother not widening the pool to include sexuals? 

 

It's one reason I very, very, very firmly refuse to use the label demisexual or anything. Sure, technically, I fit "demi" - my wife is the only person to ever trigger sexual attraction in me and it's actually caused friction in our marriage that she experiences it regularly for other people and I only experience it for her... but people try to lump me in with aces if I use it and I very firmly do not want to in any way use the term asexual or anything related to it because I am not asexual . I love my sex life with my wife, we have frequent sexual encounters we both want and desire and enjoy. We've bought three drawers full of sex toys to enjoy together. While apart due to LDR visa issues, we do virtual sex stuff.  In absolutely no way am I asexual. I am not "on the spectrum". Sure, I can relate to aces in many ways due to not experiencing sexual attraction for 30 years and IDing as ace for five, but I am not an ace.

 

Now that I am married to the wonderful woman I find attractive, there is little separating me from any other sexual person... I just only want my wife, whereas many want lots of people. But, I don't consider that a big enough gap to try to butt in on the asexual spaces. Because, I know, before I met my wife (actually on here )  then I found it extremely frustrating trying to find other aces and ending up with "Yeah, I'd F the whole town if I could... I love sex!" being what I was met with, or "Yeah, I would need sex at least once a week in a serious relationship" and I ended up giving up on the idea of finding anyone and swearing to just be single (then met my wife who had come to a similar conclusion) for the rest of my life. I mean, yay, I'm glad the frustration ended up bringing me and my wife together in a way... but... man, I feel bad for aces trying to date if they are running into the same thing I did when I attempted it under that ID. 

[Guest]

Being gay isn't a spectrum. You're either gay or you're bi or straight. None of those are a spectrum, though the WAY you can be those things can vary (one gay man might be very promiscuous, one may have had the same partner for 20 years, one may date based heavily on looks while one may be more demisexual, etc etc etc).

 

Why do the same rules not apply to asexuality?

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Someone Else said:

Some aces like kissing, some due to erogenous zones can feel pleasure from sex even though they aren't specifically attracted to anyone, some like to make out, some can see physical  attraction.  Others are the opposite.  That sounds like a spectrum to me. 

But all those same things apply to homosexuality and no one says ''the homosexual spectrum''.

 

Are gay people who enjoy kissing less valid than those who don't enjoy kissing just because no one identifies homosexuality as a spectrum? No.

[Philip027]

Quote

I mean... honestly, isn't that already kinda a thing? When I ID'd as ace and was trying to find other aces to date, I found it extremely difficult to find anyone that didn't want sex to be part of the relationship (and quite honestly, I recommend any asexual to ask about this before dating another ace). A "sex free asexual" was what I ended up looking for... which seemed like a needle in a haystack. I got "asexual - well, actually cupiosexual but it's on the spectrum so I just say ace" and "asexual... well, really sapiosexual, but it's on the spectrum so I just say ace", etc, etc. People ranged from wanting sex once per month to several times per week. Several aces profiles I had looked at had things on it like "I've tried dating other asexuals and none of them are actually asexual, so just don't message me if you want to date. Looking for friends only." I ended up resorting to dating sexuals on the online dating sites, because I literally couldn't find an asexual that wasn't also seeking sex from me and at that point, why bother not widening the pool to include sexuals? 

And all of this is literally the end result of the prevailing attitude that anyone can be asexual if they say they are.

 

While I'm sure AVEN isn't solely to blame for this, their official stance being what it is makes it plain as day that they aren't helping to make this issue any better.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Philip027 said:

And all of this is literally the end result of the prevailing attitude that anyone can be asexual if they say they are.

 

While I'm sure AVEN isn't solely to blame for this, their official stance being what it is makes it plain as day that they aren't helping to make this issue any better.

Meh. There is no point arguing that anymore. BoD has spoken. But, yeah... that's why I reject any label other than just plain old sexual. I haven't quite figured out my flavor of sexual (uhm, I don't really like women, but I love my wife, so er, I dunno? I guess bi? pan? *shrug*). But, it's somewhere firmly in sexual. Not demi and on the asexual spectrum, so will call myself ace. I wouldn't do that to the aces on here I know and respect. 😛 

[SithLord]

It's not new. And I imagine it began with people mostly just having very, very low interest in other people relating more to the "no" answer of asexuality and therefore wanting to be connecting more with asexuality than normal sexuality. I don't really have a problem with it as long as people understand that it's a grey area where "sexuality" begins and "the asexual spectrum" ends and we'll always argue over that. Because I personally view it as a sexuality spectrum completely separate from other orientations unless you wanted to make pansexuality the opposite of asexuality and all the other ones falls somewhere in the middle of a 3D diagram which is confusing to visualize. 

 

All in all, if someone's able to recognize that everything in sexuality is a spectrum (heterosexuality, homosexuality, etc.) then I don't really care if they say acespec. And as long as they're cool with asexuality being a term for the 0 answer, the "no", rather than "Not most of the time", then we're not going to have a problem. I just have a problem with people who use asexuality (or ace, which is an abbreviation of asexuality no matter what AVEN's official things says) to mean anyone acespec since there are a lot of people who don't really make sense to count as asexual even if they technically count.

[Scottthespy]

To me, this entire debate is an argument for doing away with specific labels all together. That way we can have the 'spectrum' run between ace and pansexual, and everything else can just be descriptors. I'm an ace who's okay with sex for my partners sake, I'm pan but only for people I get close to, I'm a raging nympho but only for furries, ect ect. This debate, the whole debate about what to include under the term asexual...not under the community but under the definition of the term...has cropped up a number of issues. People getting offended when you say 'that doesn't really fit', people getting offended when you insist it does fit, people getting confused when words they don't know or that don't make etymological sense start flying around, and people on the outside using all this confusion to delegitimize the community as a whole. Why is the label itself so important? Is it because it gives a sense of community? You don't need a label for that, just people who accept you. Does it make it easier to describe yourself? Well not the way its going now it doesn't. Why are people so desperate to be included under a niche label? Especially one that has essentially no practical effect on their life?

[Philip027]

Quote

Meh. There is no point arguing that anymore. BoD has spoken.

I don't much care if the "BoD" has "spoken".  "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing," after all.

[AshenPhoenix]

Hmmm, this went somewhere real fast.

 

I guess my personal final notes would be that most major sexual studies have proven no one is really a hundred percent anything. And trying to make the definition of anything a gold-star asexual, gold star gay, or gold star lesbian argument is... Not fun for literally anyone who doesn't already know from age 13 they they're gay, asexual, or straight (provided they have the definition of all these things). I know if personally someone had told me "Bro, just identify as what you want, it's not the end of the world if you don't fit the box" my early life would've been multitudes easier.

[Philip027]

Quote

I guess my personal final notes would be that most major sexual studies have proven no one is really a hundred percent anything.

Unless you can name us a "sexual study" that has tested every person on the planet, I would say no, they haven't "proven" that -- at least not any more than, say, Freud has "proven" that we all secretly lust after our parents, or something.

[Knight of Cydonia]

2 hours ago, FaerieFate said:

I'm asexual. I have a high libido. I masturbate. I watch porn. I write and read erotica. If I had a romantic partner I'd be sexually active both to make them happy and because it helps my migraines. 

 

But I'm asexual. I don't experience sexual attraction. I have no desire to have sex. Any sex I DO have isn't for the sex itself, but other reasons. Ya know? 

 

And just because I'm asexual doesn't mean the plumbing doesn't work. Ya know? Like, people can get off from things that's not arousing to them because that's just how the human body reacts to stimulation. 

 

That's not to say all asexuals are like me. Asexuals whose plumbing doesn't work are valid. Asexuals that are sex repulsed are valid. Asexuals that are happiest in a relationship that doesn't include sex are valid. That's all okay too.

 

But, there's a spectrum there. I'm just as asexual as a sex- repulsed asexual that'll never have sex and are happiest pretending it doesn't exist. But we're not the same.

 

Sometimes this is a heated topic. Beware. 

 

40 minutes ago, Someone Else said:

Some aces like kissing, some due to erogenous zones can feel pleasure from sex even though they aren't specifically attracted to anyone, some like to make out, some can see physical  attraction.  Others are the opposite.  That sounds like a spectrum to me.  Just a lot of people who can only see one side and therefore deny the existence and validity of any other way of feeling -- now that's annoying;   "I'm ace, I don't like kissing, therefore no ace can.  NO SPECTRUM ALLOWED!" 
Sometimes I wonder why I am still here.  

But your level of libido, whether or not you masturbate, whether or not you watch porn, how often you have sex, how much you enjoy sex, how much you like kissing... NONE of those are specific to asexuality and can easily vary for anyone, regardless of sexuality. The ONLY thing that is common among asexuals, that separates us from everyone else, is that we have a total lack of an intrinsic desire for sex; in other words, we feel sexual attraction towards no-one. That's literally what defines an asexual, after all.

 

[FaerieFate]

22 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

And all of this is literally the end result of the prevailing attitude that anyone can be asexual if they say they are.

 

While I'm sure AVEN isn't solely to blame for this, their official stance being what it is makes it plain as day that they aren't helping to make this issue any better.

We're not here to tell people who is and isn't allowed. We're here to educate. The problem here is AVEN's definition is lack of sexual attraction, but some people are saying it's a lack of desire for sex. 

 

I'm not saying who is right or wrong. I find it WAY too exhausting to label people, not to mention impossible because I don't know how you feel. Asking if you're asexual is like asking if you're happy. Idk, are you happy?

 

However, sex feels REALLY GOOD (or so I heard. I've never had it.)  So doesn't it make sense for someone to want sex because it feels REALLY GOOD, but not be sexually attracted to the person they're having sex with? Perhaps they aren't attracted to that partner sexually, they just want the sex because it feels REALLY GOOD. 

 

Are they asexual? I dunno. If they ask me, "I really like sex. It feels really good. Am I asexual? " How do I know if they're sexually attracted to anyone? So I'm not gonna question them. They say they're ace. Great. As long as they point out that there's so many different ways to experience asexuality. 

[AshenPhoenix]

7 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

Unless you can name us a "sexual study" that has tested every person on the planet, I would say no, they haven't "proven" that -- at least not any more than, say, Freud has "proven" that we all secretly lust after our parents, or something.

Well, you're correct, actually. I misspoke while typing. The number of people who are "truly" straight, gay, etc. (100%, no attraction whatsoever to X or Y, or at all) is so low that it might as well be nil. Should have clarified that. My bad for missing the word "nearly".I made that point in an earlier post anyway.

 

Point still stands, and I would assume we still consider sampling a good measure of science, lest we wish to throw the last 1,000 years of it out the window. The number of people who actually qualify strictly for the labels heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual are so comically low that if we truly forced people to adhere to them. We'd have to start using the actual labels instead (androsexual, pansexual, gynosexual, etc. etc.), and probably 50% plus of the ppopulation would end up pansexual. (though I, obviously, have no actual figures for that one)

 

But that all sounds like. A whole lot of work. Considering people choose the one that's most suited for them anyway. You still get an A on a test if you score 90% or higher. I feel like sexuality is an okay thing for that too.

[Knight of Cydonia]

1 hour ago, FaerieFate said:

We're not here to tell people who is and isn't allowed. We're here to educate. The problem here is AVEN's definition is lack of sexual attraction, but some people are saying it's a lack of desire for sex. 

Okay I really don't want to start a definition debate but since you brought up AVEN's definition, it's been pointed out many times that AVEN's definition of "sexual attraction" is "desire to have sexual contact with someone else or to share our sexuality with them" so I fail to see how asexuality is not a lack of desire for sex?

 

I think a problem is that it's hard to educate when people aren't even clear on AVEN's own definition of asexuality.

 

1 hour ago, FaerieFate said:

So doesn't it make sense for someone to want sex because it feels REALLY GOOD, but not be sexually attracted to the person they're having sex with?

Uhh, not to me, it doesn't. Actively wanting sex with someone for physical pleasure seems pretty not asexual.

[Gifted With Singleness]

I think there is some merit to thinking of asexuality as a spectrum, but you can only go so far with that before you end up in snowflake-land, and based on what I've seen, we're way past that point.

 

The way I see it is that, for all intents and purposes, negligible sexual desire is practically indistinguishable from a complete lack of sexual desire. As an analogy, the definition of "broke" is that you don't have any money. But if someone said they were broke, and they have precisely 25 cents to their name, it doesn't make sense to get mad at them for "incorrectly" calling themselves broke. A quarter is a negligible amount of money.

 

The same reasoning applies when it comes to asexuality. If you kinda sorta barely wanted to have sex with someone one day 30 years ago, and that's literally the only time in your entire life you ever wanted to have sex, then that is a negligible amount of sexual desire. It really doesn't make sense to get mad at that person for "incorrectly" identifying as asexual.

 

Unfortunately, there's not a clear dividing line for how low your sexual desire has to be for it to be considered "negligible". And because of our fear of invalidating people, this "asexual spectrum" kept getting bigger and bigger until it got so comically large that the word no longer means anything.

 

Despite these ambiguities, I can think of some criteria that are absolutely crystal clear. For example, I would consider sexual frustration incompatible with asexuality. If having sex is important to you to the point where lifelong celibacy feels like a major sacrifice, then I fail to see how it makes any sense to call yourself asexual (or even gray-ace for that matter).