Is it really reasonable to classify semisexuality into asexual groups?

[Diana Диана]

Someone thinks the people have Masturbate or sex behaviors are not the strictly asexual🤔

Just a friendly discuss😸😸

[Ceebs]

Many asexuals masturbate. It's not a partnered sexual activity (ok well, it can be, but presumably we're not talking about that here) and asexuality is a lack of intrinsic desire for partnered sex. So engaging in solo masturbation doesn't automatically make someone not asexual. 

 

What are 'sex behaviours', though?

[everywhere and nowhere]

How do you define asexuality? It's very strict to consider only people without any sexual behaviour whatsoever asexual. These would be nonlibidoist people. Some asexuals have a libido. In fact - I think that it proves even more strongly that asexuality is a separate phenomenon which can't be reduced to low libido: if a person engages in autoerotic behaviour, has erotic fantasies, and still doesn't desire partnered sex - it proves that sexual desire doesn't depend only on libido, that asexuality is not a result of some possible pathology, but a separate sexual orientation.

Unfortunately, Russian groups have been known for a tendency to perceive only nonlibidoist people as asexual, and I'm sorry that this tendency is still around.

 

Вижу, что Ты не понимаеш хорошо английского языка, поэтому я попробоваю написать по-русски (хотя мне много легче читать чем писать на русском языке). Как Ты определяеш асексуальность? К сожаленнию, у русских групп была всегда тенденция до классифицирования только безвлеченных (nonlibidoist) людей как асексуальных. Але асексуальность - это что-то больше. Если можно иметь сексуальное влечение, но не хочеть секса с никаком человеком - это доказываеть, что асекаусльности не возможно уменшить до недостачи влечения.

[Diana Диана]

《asexuality is a lack of intrinsic desire for partnered sex. 》But a demisexual have ability to experiences sexual attraction and desire wich the specific partner, so the intrinsic desire with their partner is exist of demiasexual,that why i ask <Is it really reasonable to classify semisexuality into asexual groups?>❤️thanks for your reply

[Guest]

What is semisexuality?

 

[Diana Диана]

1 minute ago, theV0ID said:

What is semisexuality?

 

demisexuality,i wrote it wrong🤣

[Homer]

21 minutes ago, Diana Диана said:

Is it really reasonable to classify semisexuality into asexual groups?

Personally I don't think it is, but that is a hot topic on here.

[Guest]

I don't consider demisexuality to be a type of asexuality. It's a type of (allo)sexuality. But since demisexuals may spend significant portions of their lives without a deep enough bond to experience sexual attraction/desire they can have a lot in common with asexuals.

[Diana Диана]

16 minutes ago, Nowhere Girl said:

How do you define asexuality? It's very strict to consider only people without any sexual behaviour whatsoever asexual. These would be nonlibidoist people. Some asexuals have a libido. In fact - I think that it proves even more strongly that asexuality is a separate phenomenon which can't be reduced to low libido: if a person engages in autoerotic behaviour, has erotic fantasies, and still doesn't desire partnered sex - it proves that sexual desire doesn't depend only on libido, that asexuality is not a result of some possible pathology, but a separate sexual orientation.

Unfortunately, Russian groups have been known for a tendency to perceive only nonlibidoist people as asexual, and I'm sorry that this tendency is still around.

 

Вижу, что Ты не понимаеш хорошо английского языка, поэтому я попробоваю написать по-русски (хотя мне много легче читать чем писать на русском языке). Как Ты определяеш асексуальность? К сожаленнию, у русских групп была всегда тенденция до классифицирования только безвлеченных (nonlibidoist) людей как асексуальных. Але асексуальность - это что-то больше. Если можно иметь сексуальное влечение, но не хочеть секса с никаком человеком - это доказываеть, что асекаусльности не возможно уменшить до недостачи влечения.

согласно что вам сказала<<asexuality is a separate phenomenon which can't be reduced to low libido.asexuality is not a result of some possible pathology, but a separate sexual orientation.>>. конечно,asexuality is not a disease. it just a separate sexual orientation,which is like heterosexuals and homosexuals.❤️We are only discussing whether demisexuality is a kind of asexuality. Nowadays, all that can be found online classify demisexuality as asexual😉
 

[Ceebs]

20 minutes ago, theV0ID said:

What is semisexuality?

It was actually Thing that got talked about here on AVEN a decade or more ago. I was never quite sure wtf it meant. Seemed like another term for 'grey-a' to me.

[everywhere and nowhere]

5 minutes ago, Diana Диана said:

согласно что вам сказала<<asexuality is a separate phenomenon which can't be reduced to low libido.asexuality is not a result of some possible pathology, but a separate sexual orientation.>>. конечно,asexuality is not a disease. it just a separate sexual orientation,which is like heterosexuals and homosexuals.❤️We are only discussing whether demisexuality is a kind of asexuality. Nowadays, all that can be found online classify demisexuality as asexual😉

Well, in this case I partially agree - demisexuality is not asexuality. However, it has much in common: a demisexual person is basically asexual unless there is a bond which would make them experience sexual desire. It's not the same as only desiring sex within a relationship - an allosexual person who doesn't accept casual sex may feel unsatisfied desire if they are not in a relationship. A demisexual person won't feel that there's anything missing because, without a bond, they don't feel any sexual desire.

[Diana Диана]

4 minutes ago, theV0ID said:

I don't consider demisexuality to be a type of asexuality. It's a type of (allo)sexuality. But since demisexuals may spend significant portions of their lives without a deep enough bond to experience sexual attraction/desire they can have a lot in common with asexuals.

To be more precise, it is a sexual orientation between asexuality and sexuality.Just personal opinion, not necessarily correct🤪

[Anthracite_Impreza]

I don't consider it so; it's a kind of sexuality, whereas asexual is nil. Not opposed to demis in ace spaces due to common ground, but they aren't asexual (and I don't accept "asexual spectrum" either, you can't have a spectrum of nothing).

[Homer]

1 hour ago, Diana Диана said:

it is a sexual orientation between asexuality and sexuality.

How does that work? Something either does happen or it doesn't. There is nothing inbetween these two.

[everywhere and nowhere]

1 hour ago, Diana Диана said:

To be more precise, it is a sexual orientation between asexuality and sexuality.Just personal opinion, not necessarily correct🤪

 

10 minutes ago, Homer said:

How does that work? Something either does happen or it doesn't. There is nothing inbetween these two.

It is by itself problematic to use the word "sexuality" to mean "the state of not being asexual". Sexuality is a very large spectrum, not limited to sexual orientations (asexuality is a sexual orientation too!) or sexual behaviours. It is also a force, a dimension of life (which isn't necessarily simply absent in people who don't want to have partnered sex at all), an area of theoretic reflection. We really do need separate words for "the whole spectrum of sexual phenomena" and "the state of having sexual desire for (some) other people".

[Guest]

Just my Demisexual two cents. I have more in common with an asexual who has a strong desire to masturbate or who only has sex to please a partner than I do an allosexual, albeit not by much. To treat ace-allo as binary option, or even a Venn diagram, is to grossly oversimplify the myriad experiences and feelings of human sexuality. 

 

3 hours ago, Diana Диана said:

Someone thinks the people have Masturbate or sex behaviors are not the strictly asexual🤔

Just a friendly discuss😸😸

Behavior does not equal orientation. I have sporadic homoerotic thoughts, but I am not gay. I occasionally experiment with particular BDSM/Kink activities, but that doesn't make me (insert term for relevant activity enthusiast here). I am a male who has only had sex with female-bodied or female-identified people, but that doesn't make me straight.

 

Even if you could draw a line that everyone agreed to between the behaviour categories of "sex" and "not sex", there would be identified asexual people who occasionally wander across the line briefly. That doesn't invalidate their orientation.

[Skycaptain]

I now identify as demi. Previously I identified as Asexual, but in 49 years there's only been one person I've felt attracted to or desired bending bedsprings with. It's far from impossible that I'm the only one who's identity has followed that route. So, to me, it's a reasonable hypothesis that demisexual as an identity emerged from Asexual rather than allosexual or similar identities. 

[Madelise]

As a demisexual, I've always had a lot more in common with asexuals than I do allosexuals. I've only ever been sexually attracted to one person and that was after knowing them for years (and being romantically attracted to them for some time). If I would've known more about different labels and stuff when I was younger, I would've identified as a sex-repulsed asexual for at least a couple of years probably (and as demiromantic). I do feel like there is an asexual spectrum (and aromantic spectrum) and that it (asexual) can be used as an umbrella term. I don't believe that you're either asexual or you're not. It's more complicated than that. Greyaces and demis aren't allo; they're closer to ace than anything. I will never fully understand how allosexuals feel, but I do completely understand how asexuals feel.

[Tetus]

Two questions I would pose here:

 

First, why should we treat ace/allo as a hard binary? Human behavior and subjective experience is way too complex to reduce to binaries in pretty much every other setting, as we continue to realize. Straight/gay isn't a good binary. Man/woman isn't a good binary. Autism/Neurotypical isn't a good binary. Why would ace/allo be a good one? In fact, of the examples, we can see the direct correlation with the straight/gay binary: bi people exist. Among bi people, there are folks who have different preferences or levels of attraction to different genders. That said, a similar question does arise in LGBTQ+ spaces, but I think everyone already has a sense that bi erasure isn't a positive force in the world - it would not be helpful, for instance, to say 'well, bi people are really just a subset of straight people that have experimented' or vice versa. And anyway, spectrums are more compelling models of human behavior than binaries anyway.

 

Second, what does exclusion get us? What does inclusion get them? For exclusion - I don't actually see a benefit to the ace community. For inclusion - well, as some in this thread have posted, they have some of the same experiences ace folks do. Why should the community bother with legislating them out of existence?

[Sarah-Sylvia]

Being in the gray area isn't asexuality by strict definition, but considering the diversity of how people can be, it only makes sense to include the spectrum as part of the community.  And in the end does it make a big difference? Someone who's a sex-indifferent ace doesn't have much different with me, and a sex-favourable ace probably likes sex more than I do. (I'm graysexual btw)

To me that's how I see it, it's just very nuanced and in the end a lot of us face the same kinds of situations, with some differences.

We're all in the asexual community, even if by definition some of us aren't strictly asexual. Asexual (or ace-spec) as an umbrella can make sense so long as we know how the word is being used.

[Homer]

3 hours ago, Epic Tetus said:

Why would ace/allo be a good one?

Because "no" and "not no" is a basic, very straightforward concept. "X does not happen" is, by definition, a binary issue. This is not even remotely in the same ballpark as any of the other things you mentioned. At least not with the definition that AVEN provides on its front page.

 

Also, it has nothing to do with the community being inclusive or not.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

Just now, Homer said:

Because "no" and "not no" is a basic, very straightforward concept. "X does not happen" is, by definition, a binary issue. This is not even remotely in the same ballpark as any of the other things you mentioned. At least not with the definition that AVEN provides on its front page.

 

Also, it has nothing to do with the community being inclusive or not.

The world is much more diverse and nuanced than that. Usually thinking in terms of black and white doesn't show much of what's actually going on.

[Homer]

Just now, Sarah-Sylvia said:

The world is much more diverse and nuanced than that. Usually thinking in terms of black and white doesn't show much of what's actually going on.

All I'm doing is making use of the info that AVEN provides.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

12 minutes ago, Homer said:

All I'm doing is making use of the info that AVEN provides.

Then you didn't check the AVEN wiki. It talks as asexuality as an umbrella term as well. (in terms of the spectrum)

[Tetus]

Just now, Homer said:

Because "no" and "not no" is a basic, very straightforward concept. "X does not happen" is, by definition, a binary issue. This is not even remotely in the same ballpark as any of the other things you mentioned. At least not with the definition that AVEN provides on its front page.

 

Also, it has nothing to do with the community being inclusive or not.

Let's tackle inclusivity first. Of course there's a relationship here. To lean on the example of bi folks again, it's not really a cool move when gay communities say "Well, you're welcome to hang out with us, but you should know that we all think you're really just straight people who want to feel unique." And I mean, it's a very clear brightline that since bi people do experience attraction to the opposite gender, and gay people don't. It's just - it's not a helpful distinction. What good does it do anyone?

 

As for the binary thing, let's not be obtuse here. The AVEN definition is obviously fuzzy. What is 'intrinsic sexual desire', anyway? 'Intrinsic' is already an incredibly bizarre word to use to talk about any quality of humans, as we're HEAVILY affected by our environments over the course of our entire lives, and we don't have any control groups that make sense. There's no way to tease out whether specific attitudes or behaviors are nature vs nurture.

 

We know you can't just look at behavior - a lot of people will go out of their way to conform to societal expectations and will convince themselves that they want the things they're supposed to want. Some of those people will realize that they were actually gay, or ace, or whatever, but, crucially - some won't. They'll be hit by a bus before they would have had their breakthrough, or they'll muddle through a relationship where they never feel truly fulfilled because they just never knew any better. So behavior can't be the sole determinant.

 

What about internal attitudes? Well, we don't have access to the internal attitudes of other people, but even within yourself - is it possible to determine an 'intrinsic' desire from a 'non-intrinsic' one? What if you want to have sex because you want to have kids? What if you want to have sex because you want to make someone happy? What if you want to have sex because you want someone to pay you for the act? Are any or all of these disqualifying? What if you want to have sex because you really think you'd be happier if you were more like other people? For that matter, what if you DON'T want to have sex because of past trauma? What if you had past trauma as a young child, and now you don't want to have sex? Is that lack of desire 'intrinsic'? Would it be reasonable to interrogate someone in that situation to see if they qualify for the asexual label?

 

I understand the desire to fit everything into neat boxes, but I think that before doing it, you should ask yourself what the benefits are, and what the harms might be. The project of legislating who gets to claim the asexual label seems like an unhelpful one to me.

[Anthracite_Impreza]

1 hour ago, Epic Tetus said:

What about internal attitudes? Well, we don't have access to the internal attitudes of other people, but even within yourself - is it possible to determine an 'intrinsic' desire from a 'non-intrinsic' one? What if you want to have sex because you want to have kids? What if you want to have sex because you want to make someone happy? What if you want to have sex because you want someone to pay you for the act? Are any or all of these disqualifying? What if you want to have sex because you really think you'd be happier if you were more like other people? For that matter, what if you DON'T want to have sex because of past trauma? What if you had past trauma as a young child, and now you don't want to have sex? Is that lack of desire 'intrinsic'? Would it be reasonable to interrogate someone in that situation to see if they qualify for the asexual label?

It's pretty obvious that having sex for babies isn't wanting the sex, it's wanting babies. Having sex to please a partner, while you would never miss it if they said "I've converted to X religion and am now celibate", is not wanting sex either, it's doing someone a favour. Wanting sex because you enjoy it however, is wanting sex for the sake of sex, which is what sexuality is.

 

Trauma and social influence are issues, but the difference is that once the "issue" is resolved your underlying orientation will become apparent. Intrinsic in this sense just means deep down, a strong impulse from within yourself. Being trans it's pretty obvious what that means to me, cos no matter how much everyone (including myself) has tried to (in some cases literally) beat the transness out of me, guess what? I'm still a male, it's intrinsic.

[Homer]

1 hour ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Then you didn't check the AVEN wiki. It talks as asexuality as an umbrella term as well. (in terms of the spectrum)

Which I think of as grossly misleading and harmful.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

4 minutes ago, Homer said:

Which I think of as grossly misleading and harmful.

It's come to be known as an umbrella as well, on other sites and wikipedia mentions that too. You can dislike that but it helps with knowing that there's an inclusive community associated with the word.

That said, personally I do like having good definitions of things, and I'm all for the asexual spectrum but as far as saying I'm asexual I don't feel like doing that because I like to be clearer. Although, depending on how sexual attraction is seen, someone might say I'm asexual myself since I don't have attraction to a person that makes me want to have sex with them. That's not what I base myself on though, and I feel better to be considered graysexual.

[Tetus]

10 minutes ago, Anthracite_Impreza said:

Trauma and social influence are issues, but the difference is that once the "issue" is resolved your underlying orientation will become apparent. Intrinsic in this sense just means deep down, a strong impulse from within yourself. Being trans it's pretty obvious what that means to me, cos no matter how much everyone (including myself) has tried to (in some cases literally) beat the transness out of me, guess what? I'm still a male, it's intrinsic.

I can appreciate the concept here, but the problem is twofold: One, not everyone has a clarity of identity that they just know exactly what their whole deal is from some core self. I don't have that. This isn't saying other people don't have it, just that not everyone does. I can't appeal to an unwavering core of being that is unquestionable and untainted from all outside influence.

 

Two: Again, not for everyone, but for many survivors of trauma, trauma isn't something that is resolved and then gone, revealing the true self beneath. It's something that remains, and needs to be contended with as a part of who you are. I don't mean to frame it as inescapable, and there may be people who completely overcome their trauma and never think about it again, but that hasn't been my experience, and honestly, my experience of trauma is far less than many peoples'. I'll never know who I would have been if my life had gone differently, and moreover, I'm not 'really' that other person. I'm the person who has lived the life and had the experiences I've had, and for better or worse, they've had an impact on me. I don't know how to tell where my intrinsic nature begins and ends, and trust me, it's not through lack of trying - critical self reflection and introspection are not my weak suits.

 

Ultimately, though, my point is that people very rarely have one single reason for doing things. They might provide a single reason, but the real reasons behind any given action are likely to be labyrinthine, following a sometimes rational, often not path through past experience, in the moment judgement, and the levels of various chemicals in various parts of the brain. Trying to pluck one specific 'self' out of that swirling vortex seems to me to be, at best, incredibly difficult, unless your poles all align the same way every time and you never doubt your actions or yourself. But that's my experience, and I'm sure others feel differently. I just think it might be more common than you think.

[Karekare]

Similar to @Elise Jennings I'm just gonna put my 2 cents here as a demisexual

 

Whether or not you think demis should be included in ace community I don't really care. I'm used to being told my sexuality is "fake" at this point, by lots of people inside and outside the ace community itself. But I'll tell you one thing: I feel comfortable here. I know how I feel about sex and relationships in general, and I know the terms demisexual and demiromantic fit me very very well. They make me comfortable, they give me a feeling that I can explain myself to others by giving them a simple word or two that they can go google. 

 

I relate to a asexuals (and aromantics) a lot, the concepts of sexual desire and especially romantic desire often confuse me. I've been labelled as "weird" growing up with little to no interest in anything related to it, which I think a lot of asexuals relate to as well. I feel like if people thought I didn't belong in ace spaces they wouldn't have assumed I was asexual for years before I found the term demi. So if anything, as a demisexual I like to say that I personally lean heavy on the asexual side of the spectrum anyway. So I have a place here.