What's 'Real' Asexuality?

[Guest Heligan]

Interesting. Then most celibates would strive to become asexual as theit ultimate goal: no longer be sexual in actions or mind. I must admit I have a hard time accepting this, it seems very different from people who are simply asexual by orientation. It seems strange grouping those very different experiences of sexuality or lack of it under the same word.

I can tell you that a few years ago, I decided to give up meat, sweets and what I consider junk food of all kinds. Since then, I have kept such things out of my house (besides fish), and only really make exceptions when I'm at my mom's for dinner (I don't want to be ungracious about her food). So, anyway, this is how I've been eating for a long time. Some might consider that sort of a diet to be a sacrifice. What I found was that after a short period of habituation, my desire for all of these sorts of foods was completely gone, and it doesn't seem like a sacrifice at all.

I would agree with this about diet changes.

In fact it can be even more extreme than just not wanting things; axctually hating certain tastes and textures might develop. Cutting out salt for example, makes it very difficult to eat over even slightly over salted soup. I recently went veggie, and did have the occassional craving for meat; in fact I did fall off wagon (in first month) when I ate some chicken I had bought for a cat that then died. It was vile all chewy not crunchy; upto that point I had thought I missed the texture of meat.

[Sammie]

I can tell you that a few years ago, I decided to give up meat, sweets and what I consider junk food of all kinds. Since then, I have kept such things out of my house (besides fish), and only really make exceptions when I'm at my mom's for dinner (I don't want to be ungracious about her food). So, anyway, this is how I've been eating for a long time. Some might consider that sort of a diet to be a sacrifice. What I found was that after a short period of habituation, my desire for all of these sorts of foods was completely gone, and it doesn't seem like a sacrifice at all.

First on the food analogy:

- apart from some foods being addictive, junk food is not something we have a need for. We don't have a natural sweetness drive. That's a significant difference.

- research shows a good deal of our tastes in food are based on experience. We like tastes that we're conditioned to like. Sexuality seems to me more complicated then that.

That aside, I'm not saying celibates can not condition themselves to feeling no desire for sex at all. Even with biology getting in the way, it might be possible. Still, that's significantly different from people who just never wanted sex. Consider: why did you get junk food out of the house? Because you felt it was bad for you, right? That makes you a very different person from someone who just hasn't got a taste for junk food, even after trying to 'fit in' and eat junk food like his fellow peers. There's a difference in tastes and attitude.

Olivier pointed out to me that there's also a topic about this op apositive.org: http://www.apositive.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=105 Its quite extensive, I wish I had the time to read it. Just thought I'd post the link in case someone's interested.

Heligan, I see you posted twice a few minutes before me. I'm currently busy and overworked, so I'll read that later.

[Guest Heligan]

First on the food analogy:

- apart from some foods being addictive, junk food is not something we have a need for. We don't have a natural sweetness drive. That's a significant difference.

- research shows a good deal of our tastes in food are based on experience. We like tastes that we're conditioned to like. Sexuality seems to me more complicated then that.

That aside, I'm not saying celibates can not condition themselves to feeling no desire for sex at all. Even with biology getting in the way, it might be possible. Still, that's significantly different from people who just never wanted sex. Consider: why did you get junk food out of the house? Because you felt it was bad for you, right? That makes you a very different person from someone who just hasn't got a taste for junk food, even after trying to 'fit in' and eat junk food like his fellow peers. There's a difference in tastes and attitude.

Actually we do have a biological drive for sweet foods; it started with fruit and then society got involved and just went for sugar. This is often given as an example of a genetic disposition derailed by society into being harmful.

I'm not sure that deciding not to eat junk food, isnt just taking back the choice that was made for you by society. Giving your body the option to decide.

For instance when I went veggie it was because I realised I really objected to killing animals and it would not be something I would ever have chosen to do (it was thrust upon me when I was too young to know the difference) Its very easy to go with conditioning and not feel guilt, but intellectually I thought I should feel guilt. I still dont feel guilt about meat eating I did in past or if I did it in future; but I believe that to be a fault of my guilt mechanisms rather than that it isnt due. I see being veggie as freeing myself from social pressures I didnt even realise I had sucummed to.

The implication you are making here is that asexuals are born not made, that sexuality is not fluid. Here you are disagreeing (not only with me) but with the founders of the board, and most reputable sexologists.

[Gatto]

.

[Brit_in_Canada]

Asexuality feels completely normal to me. How many times does the straight person comment that they cannot understand how the gay person can find sodomy erotic. In my particular category of asexuality I could put the same question to anybody who finds any type of sex erotic.

I have often wondered whether the human brain has 'potentials', of the positronic variety, such that at some stage, around puberty possibly, the 'potential' associated with procreation starts to overcome the 'potential' associated with revulsion, except in the case of asexuals. Sex is not intrinsically beautiful, as any rape victim can attest, so a married couple must be internally overcoming the revulsion that would normally accompany the act.

This is not intended to be an anti-sexual post, incidentally, I believe people should be free to do whatever makes them happy, I'm just commenting on why asexuality feels such a very normal disposition.

[Sammie]

The implication you are making here is that asexuals are born not made, that sexuality is not fluid. Here you are disagreeing (not only with me) but with the founders of the board, and most reputable sexologists.

I do however think that sexuality is somewhat fluid, if not so much as some people would like to believe. I don't believe in people 'turning gay', or 'curing asexuality', or anything like that.

But fluid, yes. Words, however, are hardly fluid. If we take the word 'asexuality' and then take away all its boundries so it can mean anything people choose to call asexual, then the word itsself is useless. If it can include anything, it doesn't really mean anything. So we'll have to think about: what is asexuality and what makes it diferent from celibacy, repression or low-sexuality? Is it different?

I'm not saying we should make rules, kick people out. I'm just saying we should not be afraid to try to talk about what is or isn't asexuality. I completely agree with what Olivier said:

self-identification is so important for other reasons that I think the only thing to do is to stick with it, and accept all its consequences.

This is true. Let's not exclude, lets not draw strict lines. But let's keep talking about what is and isn't asexuality. What's the harm in talking?