Before you start a topic saying "Is asexuality connected with..."

[test account]

I respect the sincerity of all opinions stated and only want to say that I've found these threads very enlightening and helpful because there is usually divided opinion. This tells me that whatever preconceived ideas I might have had on the topic are not shared by everyone, and that's enough for me. As someone who grew up in a separatist cult, I find it refreshing to witness such diversity.

However I do suspect many people don't search for their topic before they start a new thread. I've been guilty of that in the past. Perhaps if people only added to threads already in the forums it wouldn't look so much like an inundation of similar topics.

[Sally]

IHowever I do suspect many people don't search for their topic before they start a new thread. I've been guilty of that in the past. Perhaps if people only added to threads already in the forums it wouldn't look so much like an inundation of similar topics.

Good point.

And I am in no way wanting to stop people from wondering or thinking, just asking that before they make yet another post on the connection between, say, autism and asexuality, that they do a little investigation (google, even) or at least check previous theads.

[Shortass Lady]

This is fair enough. I see what you're saying. But bear in mind this forum is here to provide a platform for discussion, and if someone has a musing on their mind, I think it's OK for them to share it to see what other people think, and maybe find more definite answers to their questions. The people asking these questions might in fact be the new people themselves, and telling them not to ask questions isn't going to help if someone's worried or wondering.

[red_brick_dream]

A lot of people around here seem to have this strange, wishy-washy idea that asexuality has no cause; that it exists in a vacuum, independent of everything else we consider ourselves to be as a matter of subjectivity. Well, everything about you has a neurological basis. Unless you're religious in some way, or believe that there's an intangible, ethereal soul/spirit floating around somewhere outside your head, there's just no question. We don't know what causes sexual orientation; we don't know how it comes about. We have some leads - there are studies pointing to certain genes, certain environmental factors, certain socio-psychological factors, which have been associated with homosexuality, for example. So right off the bat, it seems very possible that there is no one single cause. So why? Why do people come around and try and shoot down any discussion or speculation about potential causes of the way we are? Surely, we are the way we are - that's a truism if ever there was one, so there must be some way that this state of affairs came about. This is not a value judgement. It's just a fact. Even if homosexuality, for example, were an outright choice (it's not) the homophobes of the world would still have all their work ahead of them. Talking about causes is not tantamount to slander, and it's not an implication that the way we are is somehow illegitimate. Sometimes it's construed that way, but that's a mistake; sometimes it's implied to be that way, which is an even bigger mistake. And I would go so far as to say that the failure to notice that betrays some level of insecurity or discomfort with debate on the parts of those who've been hostile to these threads.

It's precisely because we don't know what the causes of sexual orientation are that speculation and debate are in order. And since, like I said earlier, there seem to be a few possible causes, which may or may not work in tandem with one another, it seems, at least a priori, that one person could be asexual for a different reason than the next. So why not explore what those causes might be? Confidence is hard-won, and it's difficult sometimes to come to terms with asexuality, and to ask certain questions of ourselves. I know that several people on this website have come out and said that "Hey, I'm not asexual after all," and we risk alienating those people by barring these questions from being asked, and we risk lulling people who really are just trying to run away from their own latent sexuality into complacency, and thereby impeding their progress. Some people are more self-aware than others, and some people are very troubled by these potential questions - "Am I just repressed? Am I a social phobic? Am I neurologically damaged?" I was. It took my a long, painful time to come to the conclusion of my own asexuality, and I wouldn't wish that process on anybody. But it nevertheless needed to be done, and I wouldn't change it for the world. I just don't want us, in our quest to ease the confusion felt by some, to worsen the confusion felt by others with a fog of informal sanction; of social reprimand for asking certain questions.

Yes, I'm a long-winded bastard. Sorry.

[Sally]

A lot of people around here seem to have this strange, wishy-washy idea that asexuality has no cause; that it exists in a vacuum, independent of everything else we consider ourselves to be as a matter of subjectivity.

I haven't read anyone who thinks that asexuality exists in a vacuum. Everything has a cause, or possibly several causes. The only thing that's entirely true is that we don't know the cause of asexualty, and speculation on the part of non-scientists isn't going to prove that cause. However, constant speculation with many many threads per speculative issue may scare some people and cause them to feel that "Gee, there are 12 threads about brain damage; I must have brain damage!" That's not "exploration" of causes.

But I've already said that before and I'm not going to convince you that I'm not in favor of extinguishing free speech, so I'll shut up.

[cosmicbimbo]

There is a right way and a wrong way to ask questions. If people want to explore causes then why can't they just ask "what is the cause of asexuality"? That way no body freaks out that the cause might be something bad. It just opens it up to discussion.

[red_brick_dream]

I haven't read anyone who thinks that asexuality exists in a vacuum. Everything has a cause, or possibly several causes. The only thing that's entirely true is that we don't know the cause of asexualty, and speculation on the part of non-scientists isn't going to prove that cause. However, constant speculation with many many threads per speculative issue may scare some people and cause them to feel that "Gee, there are 12 threads about brain damage; I must have brain damage!" That's not "exploration" of causes.

But I've already said that before and I'm not going to convince you that I'm not in favor of extinguishing free speech, so I'll shut up.

I know you're not trying to extinguish free speech, but you are suggesting that certain questions should not be asked. So you're calling for self-censorship, rather than official censorship. I had never accused you of trying to stifle it; rather. that you were calling for "informal sanctions" as I had put it, ie. criticism of those who ask them. And your stated rationale is that we are nowhere near knowing the answers to these questions, and that in the meantime, asking them may confuse certain people, and lead them to false [negative] conclusions about why they are the way they are. But there are lots of potentially misleading facts or notions in the world; indeed, you never even try to conclude as to whether these propositions and correlations are true or false; rather, that they are in some way dangerous. To assert as an inevitability the inability of many AVEN users to read and think and come to their own conclusions borders, in my opinion, on condescention, and for whatever short term benefits there may be (I'm not convinced there really are any), in the long term, all it really does is undermine what we're all trying to do here, which is to flesh out, as best we can, the confusing problems and questions around a set of issues in which we all share an interest. And to that end, the solution to all these potentially misleading or damaging tangents into which we sometimes stumble (but for which we certainly shouldn't hold the posters accountable, as all they're trying to do is figure themselves out as well) is not to try and sweep them under the rug or ignore them; rather, to incorporate them into our discourse so that in confronting these debates, we can highlight the good ideas, discredit the bad ones, and help people figure out what they are without alienating people who have questions that make us uncomfortable.

[Kalea]

The only thing that's entirely true is that we don't know the cause of asexualty, and speculation on the part of non-scientists isn't going to prove that cause.

Who exactly is saying that speculation is meant/supposed to prove anything? Speculation is what it says - speculation. Oh, and just to reiterate what I've alluded to previously, you do NOT have to "be" a scientist in order to think like a scientist, do scientific research, and/or prove anything. Or, perhaps more accurately, since the vast majority of us are capable of thinking like a scientist and doing scientific research, we're all capable of being scientists, if it's the doing that makes us scientists. So can we please stop talking as if scientists have a monopoly on conducting scientific research? Allow speculation to be what it was meant to be (speculation) and stop trying to berate it as unscientific. Few posts allege that speculating will prove anything; it's absurd to jump all over people on the assumption that they are trying to "prove" the cause of asexuality merely because they mention correlation and/or speculation.

[Pamcakes]

These bother me, and I'm not even Ace. I do worry about how it could hurt new members to come here looking for acceptance, and be greated with more input that there might be something specifically "up" with them that's causing their Aceness.

I try to avoid commenting on those sorts of threads, though, because if an Ace member wants to question the source of their own Aceness, in the company of other Aces, who am I to tell them that's wrong? It feels like it would be tremendously presumptuous to do so.

The ones that don't worry me, but just make me roll my eyes, though, are the "Is Asexuality connected to higher brain function/intelligence/creativity/independence/an old soul/etc.?" ones, because they always come off to me as being similar in effect and motivation to something I sometimes see in fat-acceptance activism spaces, when larger-bodied women have echo chambers about how the larger body type is clearly more attractive anyway, and concern trolling both slimmer women and the men who are attracted to slimmer women as being, respectively, somehow inferior, and compensating for something/not acting on their true desires (usually decided as being either towards larger women, or towards men) due to trying to behave according to what they percieve society's expectation of them to be. My point being; it's possible to accept one's existence in a minority or oppressed group without having to somehow compensate for that group's lack of status by exulting it unrealistically within the group itself.

But, once again, it's kind of hard for me to comment on those without looking like an entitled jackass, so I generally try to leave them alone.

P.

[Pamcakes]

Ah, disapproving silence, my old friend.

If it weren't for you, I'd never know when I'd offended people.

*nervous giggle, shifty eyes, slow backing out of thread*

P.

[Sally]

These bother me, and I'm not even Ace. I do worry about how it could hurt new members to come here looking for acceptance, and be greated with more input that there might be something specifically "up" with them that's causing their Aceness.

I try to avoid commenting on those sorts of threads, though, because if an Ace member wants to question the source of their own Aceness, in the company of other Aces, who am I to tell them that's wrong? It feels like it would be tremendously presumptuous to do so.

The ones that don't worry me, but just make me roll my eyes, though, are the "Is Asexuality connected to higher brain function/intelligence/creativity/independence/an old soul/etc.?" ones, because they always come off to me as being similar in effect and motivation to something I sometimes see in fat-acceptance activism spaces, when larger-bodied women have echo chambers about how the larger body type is clearly more attractive anyway, and concern trolling both slimmer women and the men who are attracted to slimmer women as being, respectively, somehow inferior, and compensating for something/not acting on their true desires (usually decided as being either towards larger women, or towards men) due to trying to behave according to what they percieve society's expectation of them to be. My point being; it's possible to accept one's existence in a minority or oppressed group without having to somehow compensate for that group's lack of status by exulting it unrealistically within the group itself.

But, once again, it's kind of hard for me to comment on those without looking like an entitled jackass, so I generally try to leave them alone.

P.

Yay, Pam. You are not an entitled jackass. Or any kind of jackass. Of course, I don't know you personally. :lol:

I think the "asexuals are better" comments are just as bad as the "asexuals must be this/that/the other" comments.

And as far as scientists, I think that actually scientists are the ones who should comment on what has been scientifically proven (or not). Because they have studied said subjects, and have fairly good knowledge of the difference between a study and a poll. So sue me.

[Cazz333]

Fair enough. Admit what you don't know and say what you do know. Also study what you want to find out.

[Trolley Girl]

To sum up my thoughts on the matter, I try not to think of my asexuality as being a result of any artificial cause. I've mentioned this several times before, but I have Asperger's Syndrome, and I have been asked a number of times by people if I think it may have anything to do with my asexuality.

I always casually reply by saying that I heavily doubt that the two are all that intertwined, if at all, but that I would never rule out such possibilities.

[Kalea]

And as far as scientists, I think that actually scientists are the ones who should comment on what has been scientifically proven (or not). Because they have studied said subjects, and have fairly good knowledge of the difference between a study and a poll. So sue me.

You don't have to "be" a scientist to study something scientifically. Period. There's no debate; think what you want, but that doesn't change the facts. Anyone is capable of studying a phenomenon scientifically; the label of "scientist" is completely irrelevant. It's like saying only trained chefs can cook gourmet meals. That's absolutely absurd. (Yes, I'm repeating myself... and I'll continue to do so until such absurdity is acknowledged and vanquished. I'm both a scientist and a teacher, so yes, I do have the resume and experience to add weight to my assertions.) So can we please kill the nonsense that only scientists are capable of studying asexuality and "proving" things (which is a whole other can of worms; social scientists rarely "prove" anything, so saying you want "proof" is equally absurd, but I digress) or providing evidence of connections or even proposing possibilities? Please? It's utter nonsense and offends those of us who are scientists and are trying to make science more accessible and useful for non-scientists. We're not "god-like"; we have no qualities that make us different from anyone else. Therefore, others can most definitely conduct scientific studies, as well as ask questions, make and test hypotheses, and gather evidence. It's not rocket science.

[Sally]

You don't have to "be" a scientist to study something scientifically. Period. There's no debate; think what you want, but that doesn't change the facts. Anyone is capable of studying a phenomenon scientifically; the label of "scientist" is completely irrelevant. It's like saying only trained chefs can cook gourmet meals. That's absolutely absurd. (Yes, I'm repeating myself... and I'll continue to do so until such absurdity is acknowledged and vanquished. I'm both a scientist and a teacher, so yes, I do have the resume and experience to add weight to my assertions.) So can we please kill the nonsense that only scientists are capable of studying asexuality and "proving" things (which is a whole other can of worms; social scientists rarely "prove" anything, so saying you want "proof" is equally absurd, but I digress) or providing evidence of connections or even proposing possibilities? Please? It's utter nonsense and offends those of us who are scientists and are trying to make science more accessible and useful for non-scientists. We're not "god-like"; we have no qualities that make us different from anyone else. Therefore, others can most definitely conduct scientific studies, as well as ask questions, make and test hypotheses, and gather evidence. It's not rocket science.

Rocket science? :lol:

No, scientists are not gods. Neither I nor anyone else has suggested that. But although since I'm not a scientist and therefore make mistakes in using the word "prove", I do know enough to be able to tell the difference between surveys and studies, and I trust studies if they appear to be done in a fairly rigorous way. That does not include "I'm X and I've noticed that most people on AVEN are X and therefore I think all Xs are asexual (or vice versa)."

I certainly hope that you as a scientist have some intellectual capabilities and educational background and experience that non-scientists probably don't have. If that's offensive, sorry.

[Prodigious Storm]

New members are coming onto AVEN with very little information about asexuality. They may be confused, or scared, or at least concerned. They don't know what it means, and they're worried about what it says about themselves.

PLEASE consider that before you start a topic whose title is "Is Asexuality caused by/connected with ABC...XYZ". There is no scientific evidence as to what causes asexuality, any more than there is scientific evidence as to what causes heterosexuality or homosexuality. WE. DON'T. KNOW. For a new person to be confronted with 65 threads speculating that asexuality is connected with mental illness, brain damage, sexual abuse, or any number of things is really frightening (when it isn't just plain stupid or amusing). Many people don't understand the differences between causation, correlation, and pure unfounded theories.

For those who want higher visibility for asexuality, consider that all these threads don't exactly make us look any more serious about being respected as an orientation.

I totally get why you feel annoyed by speculation theories and how you find it frightening. but I do have to disagree, I was on this site years ago and have rejoined after loosing sign in info, so I suppose I'm viewed as a new comer, I'm also guilty of said arm chair theories, but I believe that that is the very purpose of this site, to philosophise and debate, to understand and accept.To offer reassurance and clear up confusion. due to high resistance about asexuality as it is considered by many to be abnormal, I think many feel the need to have reassurance and feel the need to question this judgement that we are abnormal. there is a connection to sexual trauma and damaged sexual drive so some do need to clarify if that is the case especially if it happened when they were young. depression is also something far more complex than just telling someone to cheer up.And confusion and resistance of ones sexuality can cause mental instability.I personally feel sensitivity and compassion would be a kinder better way. this is a support site first and foremost after all? But this is a rant release area and you are totally entitled to blow off steam here. best thing i could suggest is, if those threads annoy and upset you so much, don't read them? If we do have an influx of new comers I personally think that's a good thing that more are becoming aware of Asexuality. some sexually active friends of mine suggest there is more confusion due to how dirty sex is being portrayed making some teenage girls I know,find the idea disgusting. I'm not surprised they are confused and looking for answers. It is the common conception we are here to mate/go forth and multiply? religious doctrines strongly enforces this belief. for a group of humans to say that's not for them is difficult for the majority to accept.If even our own kind cannot offer understanding how can we expect the majority to take us seriously? so that's my little rant back on the subject.

[Sally]

I totally get why you feel annoyed by speculation theories and how you find it frightening.

No, you don't. I don't find it frightening. I find it depressing.

there is a connection to sexual trauma and damaged sexual drive so some do need to clarify if that is the case especially if it happened when they were young. depression is also something far more complex than just telling someone to cheer up.And confusion and resistance of ones sexuality can cause mental instability.

Neither of those are proven. Many sexuals have suffered sexual trauma without their sexual drives being damaged. And damaged/lowered sexual drive is not the same as asexuality -- check out the Front Page. Sexual confusion is sexual confusion; it is highly distressing but it doesn't cause "mental instability".

I personally feel sensitivity and compassion would be a kinder better way. this is a support site first and foremost after all? But this is a rant release area and you are totally entitled to blow off steam here. best thing i could suggest is, if those threads annoy and upset you so much, don't read them? If we do have an influx of new comers I personally think that's a good thing that more are becoming aware of Asexuality. some sexually active friends of mine suggest there is more confusion due to how dirty sex is being portrayed making some teenage girls I know,find the idea disgusting.

I'm not sure how to answer all that because it has nothing to do with the point of this thread. Read the comments others have made. This has nothing to do with how sex is being portrayed as being dirty and the effect of that on sexual teenage girls.

If even our own kind cannot offer understanding how can we expect the majority to take us seriously?

If we constantly talk about possibly equating asexuality with mental illness, sexual abuse, higher brain function, being tall, being left-handed, etc.etc., when sexual people are also mentally ill, sexually abused, very intelligent, tall, and left-handed, then how can we expect the majority to take us seriously?

Making silly speculations in the complete absence of scientific evidence doesn't help us be respected OR help us give understanding to other asexuals.

[Prodigious Storm]

I totally get why you feel annoyed by speculation theories and how you find it frightening.

No, you don't. I don't find it frightening. I find it depressing.

there is a connection to sexual trauma and damaged sexual drive so some do need to clarify if that is the case especially if it happened when they were young. depression is also something far more complex than just telling someone to cheer up.And confusion and resistance of ones sexuality can cause mental instability.

Neither of those are proven. Many sexuals have suffered sexual trauma without their sexual drives being damaged. And damaged/lowered sexual drive is not the same as asexuality -- check out the Front Page. Sexual confusion is sexual confusion; it is highly distressing but it doesn't cause "mental instability".

I personally feel sensitivity and compassion would be a kinder better way. this is a support site first and foremost after all? But this is a rant release area and you are totally entitled to blow off steam here. best thing i could suggest is, if those threads annoy and upset you so much, don't read them? If we do have an influx of new comers I personally think that's a good thing that more are becoming aware of Asexuality. some sexually active friends of mine suggest there is more confusion due to how dirty sex is being portrayed making some teenage girls I know,find the idea disgusting.

I'm not sure how to answer all that because it has nothing to do with the point of this thread. Read the comments others have made. This has nothing to do with how sex is being portrayed as being dirty and the effect of that on sexual teenage girls.

If even our own kind cannot offer understanding how can we expect the majority to take us seriously?

If we constantly talk about possibly equating asexuality with mental illness, sexual abuse, higher brain function, being tall, being left-handed, etc.etc., when sexual people are also mentally ill, sexually abused, very intelligent, tall, and left-handed, then how can we expect the majority to take us seriously?

Making silly speculations in the complete absence of scientific evidence doesn't help us be respected OR help us give understanding to other asexuals.

I'm not sure why you think that people asking questions would cause people to not take us seriously, you seam to make big claims and I doubt you have researched everything thoroughly enough, I'm afraid their are studies that prove trauma effects sexual desire, do you know anything about peptides, the neural net, how the brain works? are you a qualified professor of psychology perhaps? either way you seam very angry. Usually if you want to get your point across its better not to loose your temper. I assume you found it frightening as you were projecting that new comers would find it scary? When I first found this site I did not find it frightening but reassuring that others had similar questions, just because you on't understand someone's view point, it doesn't make them wrong. the teenager comment was relevant to try to help you understand why some need to ask those questions, but I see your too defensive to see that.I also do not believe there is any proof to substantiate your theory that philosophical debate is harming to new comers,I believe your post also though we had had more new comers so perhaps that is evidence that it does not put them off or frighten them. in order to prove anything scientifically one must first theorise. Perhaps you are insecure if you feel the need for solid proof to everything? but I assure you there has been extensive studies on the trauma that sexual abuse has on an individual, how the neural net rewires itself.the reason therapy exists is because of these studies...we know sometimes the mind needs help after a trauma. I agree that some debates may seam a little odd but I don't have to read them, nor do you.And it is not up to us to decide what questions a person can offer, at the end of the day, its helping people and that's all that matters, the proof is on this site, all these people sharing and communicating. As i said your totally entitled to be angry and your entitled to your opinions, just seams weird you feel your point of view is fact when it is nothing more than a theory just like the ones others submit.

[Prodigious Storm]

I totally get why you feel annoyed by speculation theories and how you find it frightening.

No, you don't. I don't find it frightening. I find it depressing.

there is a connection to sexual trauma and damaged sexual drive so some do need to clarify if that is the case especially if it happened when they were young. depression is also something far more complex than just telling someone to cheer up.And confusion and resistance of ones sexuality can cause mental instability.

Neither of those are proven. Many sexuals have suffered sexual trauma without their sexual drives being damaged. And damaged/lowered sexual drive is not the same as asexuality -- check out the Front Page. Sexual confusion is sexual confusion; it is highly distressing but it doesn't cause "mental instability".

I personally feel sensitivity and compassion would be a kinder better way. this is a support site first and foremost after all? But this is a rant release area and you are totally entitled to blow off steam here. best thing i could suggest is, if those threads annoy and upset you so much, don't read them? If we do have an influx of new comers I personally think that's a good thing that more are becoming aware of Asexuality. some sexually active friends of mine suggest there is more confusion due to how dirty sex is being portrayed making some teenage girls I know,find the idea disgusting.

I'm not sure how to answer all that because it has nothing to do with the point of this thread. Read the comments others have made. This has nothing to do with how sex is being portrayed as being dirty and the effect of that on sexual teenage girls.

If even our own kind cannot offer understanding how can we expect the majority to take us seriously?

If we constantly talk about possibly equating asexuality with mental illness, sexual abuse, higher brain function, being tall, being left-handed, etc.etc., when sexual people are also mentally ill, sexually abused, very intelligent, tall, and left-handed, then how can we expect the majority to take us seriously?

Making silly speculations in the complete absence of scientific evidence doesn't help us be respected OR help us give understanding to other asexuals.

IN ORDER TO PROVE ANYTHING SCIENTIFICALLY, ONE MUST FIRST THEORISE....TO GAIN EVIDENCE,ONE MUST FIRST SPECULATE....

[mylittlehazmat]

Were the caps really necessary?

[Hobbes!]

Anyone else feel this discussion has got a bit fervent? Let's not forget what the original issue was here - namely that for the sake of new, confused members of the forum it might be worth thinking twice about a speculative topic linking asexuality to, well, anything. Now there's a simple solution to this. Post such threads in the Philosophy, Politics and Science forum. Speculative discussions go on in there all the time anyway and it's less intimidating for someone who doesn't quite feel ready to think about such things yet

[Sally]

IN ORDER TO PROVE ANYTHING SCIENTIFICALLY, ONE MUST FIRST THEORISE....TO GAIN EVIDENCE,ONE MUST FIRST SPECULATE....

This is not a scientific forum. Idle speculation by people of all different ages and all different levels of education and experience does not further scientific inquiry, and opinion is not "evidence".

Yeshowa has a good point: bring this stuff up in the Philosophy section.

[Prodigious Storm]

Were the caps really necessary?

do you think just adding a post to be sarcastic is necessary? I just used capitals to highlight the statement which i did feel was necessary yes.

[Prodigious Storm]

IN ORDER TO PROVE ANYTHING SCIENTIFICALLY, ONE MUST FIRST THEORISE....TO GAIN EVIDENCE,ONE MUST FIRST SPECULATE....

This is not a scientific forum. Idle speculation by people of all different ages and all different levels of education and experience does not further scientific inquiry, and opinion is not "evidence".

Yeshowa has a good point: bring this stuff up in the Philosophy section.

I TOTALLY AGREE- this is indeed not a scientific forum, perhaps you did not see my responses questioning why proof was needed etc? Yeshowa made a nit-picky point in my opinion, nor was it anything to do with the post. I didn't realise you were both adjudicators to where people can post or what is acceptable? I was simply answering a thread, I could argue that your comment of this belonging in another thread? perhaps it belongs in philosophy or the post area for non asexuality related posts?? I doubt I'll be in this area much as everyone seams very hostile and petty here. the persons who's post it was I will defend and say this was the correct area in my opinion, they wanted to rant, I wanted to rant a reply. you perhaps misunderstood what I meant and are reading my responses from a more pedantic point of view perhaps..? I did not claim "0pinion" was "evidence" I suggested the actual recorded number of new members was evidence that a lot are not perturbed by questions of what Asexuality may be linked to.

[Prodigious Storm]

quote:Neither of those are proven. Many sexuals have suffered sexual trauma without their sexual drives being damaged. And damaged/lowered sexual drive is not the same as asexuality -- check out the Front Page. Sexual confusion is sexual confusion; it is highly distressing but it doesn't cause "mental instability".

again your not understanding me correctly I did not say knowing your Asexual itself causes mental instability but the reactions of others toward you can...(for e.g. there were incidents where gay men took their own lives after the mental anguish they were put through) and of course there are many individuals who can maintain a healthy sex drive in spite of sexual trauma, I'm taking every one into account not just those that are are not effected,as you are doing. we're all individulal's! it is not inevitable sexual trauma leads to lack of sexual desire, i'm just saying it is possible in some cases,(there is proof using brain scans to observe brain activity.)

[Ged of Earthsea]

I'm not sure why you think that people asking questions would cause people to not take us seriously, you seam to make big claims and I doubt you have researched everything thoroughly enough, I'm afraid their are studies that prove trauma effects sexual desire, do you know anything about peptides, the neural net, how the brain works? are you a qualified professor of psychology perhaps?

How are neural nets connected to asexuality?

[mylittlehazmat]

Were the caps really necessary?

do you think just adding a post to be sarcastic is necessary? I just used capitals to highlight the statement which i did feel was necessary yes.

Unfortunately, I wasn't being sarcastic. On the internet, a post written all in capitals is taken to be a person shouting, or being disrespectful. I was checking if you really meant to be so negative. Not many people like to be shouted at.

[Sally]

Yeshowa made a nit-picky point in my opinion, nor was it anything to do with the post.

Yeshowa's point was directly relevant to the purpose of this thread (which I started, so I'm familiar with the purpose). I don't remember all your posts. But it's possible to disagree with anyone or everyone without shouting or being personally insulting.

[Hobbes!]

I TOTALLY AGREE- this is indeed not a scientific forum, perhaps you did not see my responses questioning why proof was needed etc? Yeshowa made a nit-picky point in my opinion, nor was it anything to do with the post. I didn't realise you were both adjudicators to where people can post or what is acceptable? I was simply answering a thread, I could argue that your comment of this belonging in another thread? perhaps it belongs in philosophy or the post area for non asexuality related posts?? I doubt I'll be in this area much as everyone seams very hostile and petty here. the persons who's post it was I will defend and say this was the correct area in my opinion, they wanted to rant, I wanted to rant a reply. you perhaps misunderstood what I meant and are reading my responses from a more pedantic point of view perhaps..? I did not claim "0pinion" was "evidence" I suggested the actual recorded number of new members was evidence that a lot are not perturbed by questions of what Asexuality may be linked to.

I don't recall outright telling anyone where they can post anything. What I did say was that some posts might well be more suitable for a particular place on the board. Forgive me, but I rather thought that was the point of having a seperate forum for topics to do with Philosophy, Politics and Science.

[Prodigious Storm]

Unfortunately, I wasn't being sarcastic. On the internet, a post written all in capitals is taken to be a person shouting, or being disrespectful. I was checking if you really meant to be so negative. Not many people like to be shouted at.

]I wasn't aware of the rule that cap locks meant shouting or disrespect? I use them to EMPHASISE only. i am not an agressive or disrespectful person. :) My statement was not in the least negative either??? I would also use capitals to say something was brilliant,this would be to emphasise ,not shout or disrespect?

its a shame you took it that way.

I was not angry in the slightest. In my opinion pointing out if i found it "necessary" was "sarcastic" as it was evident I already had made that decision by posting it that way? perhaps instead of "sarcasm" you could have simply asked if my capitals were because i was angry,or inform me of your rule that it means shouting or disrespect? :)

I'm entitled to my opinions as well.

peace. chill, eat a muffin :) blueberry's my fav.[/i]

ps you'll be please to see i've discovered bold.:) I hope this doesn't have a hidden meaning too? where can i go to "verse up" so i don't offend anyone else?- never mind I'll google it.we should stop this pettiness now. peace my friend :) i mean you no harm.