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

[Sally]

]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? :) Any way I'm tiered of this petty chat back.

I'm entitled to my opinions as well.

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

The rule on all-caps is an internet rule, not Yeshowa's rule.

Smile emoticons don't help make an agressive post less agressive.

[Prodigious Storm]

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.

please, stop being petty now eh? we could go on like this for ages, what's the point? I know what you said, I read it, not sure what you mean really, the post was a rant? the replies got a bit philosophical and sciencey yes...but your replies have strayed from the point too...? I thought that's why they were called threads? I don't profess to know all the lingo or correct use of type etc, I don't want to pointlessly bicker either. relax have some cake :)

[mylittlehazmat]

It's not petty to try and clear ones name after accusations have been laid against it.

If you want to emphasise something, use italicising to do so. You can do so the same way as you bold something, just with "i" instead of "b". It's a much more accepted form of emphasis that doesn't carry the same negative connotations. Sally is correct, it isn't my rule, but a generally accepted form of communication on the internet. Since it is so easy to mistake someone's tone, having generally accepted rules like all caps being shouting really helps with nailing down what a particular person is driving at, and how they're feeling.

[Waterbottle20]

this thread is...

[Sally]

Let's get back to the thread topic, which is contentious enough! :lol:

[goldboy44]

Well put!!!

[fear]

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.

completely agree with that last statement. stuff like this really hits us home (for lack of a better phrase, lol) because we already live in a world where most people don't know what asexuality is/means/exists/et cetera, et cetera. and most people think you are joking and laugh. we have a bad reputation as it is. people think there's something wrong with us, just like the gays in the 60s. NAME THAT QUOTE FOR CAKE: "History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme."

[fear]

It's not petty to try and clear ones name after accusations have been laid against it.

If you want to emphasise something, use italicising to do so. You can do so the same way as you bold something, just with "i" instead of "b". It's a much more accepted form of emphasis that doesn't carry the same negative connotations. Sally is correct, it isn't my rule, but a generally accepted form of communication on the internet. Since it is so easy to mistake someone's tone, having generally accepted rules like all caps being shouting really helps with nailing down what a particular person is driving at, and how they're feeling.

THE ONLY PEOPLE I SEE USING CAPS ARE STONERS AND SOME RANDOM BALD GUY. OH WAIT... HE SEES ME!

[Ged of Earthsea]

I had a thought. Maybe another way to make someone question the confirmation bias of seeing correlations you see but may not be there is to show them other correlations which definitely exist but are ridiculous.

For example, in my entire life experience, the vast majority of people with two X-chromosomes and a cat seem to be on AVEN. Correlation?

[mad_scientist]

Maybe just shunt those threads into hotbox and see if anyone wants to fight about them? The lack of evidence probably wouldn't last long there.

[Sally]

I had a thought. Maybe another way to make someone question the confirmation bias of seeing correlations you see but may not be there is to show them other correlations which definitely exist but are ridiculous.

For example, in my entire life experience, the vast majority of people with two X-chromosomes and a cat seem to be on AVEN. Correlation?

Hell no; causation. :lol: The X-Ys have two cats.

[daveb]

I had a thought. Maybe another way to make someone question the confirmation bias of seeing correlations you see but may not be there is to show them other correlations which definitely exist but are ridiculous.

For example, in my entire life experience, the vast majority of people with two X-chromosomes and a cat seem to be on AVEN. Correlation?

Hell no; causation. :lol: The X-Ys have two cats.

I beg to differ - I only have one cat :P

[Mismatched]

Well in the case of depression, one thing that can cause it is trying to be something other than yourself. Being so different from other people and not really knowing why you can't fit in or trying to fit in a failing really caused me alot of distress, but the more concrete facts I learn about myself the better I feel. Knowing the why and how I am different has lead me to truly believe that it is okay to be different. So asexuality, aspergers, and a touch of social anxiety may still remain, but I don't feel about about it anymore. Being different doesn't cause depression but a sense of alienation does.

[Erin D]

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.

[Erin D]

In my case I think some people have a hard time believing I'm not gay let alone understanding what asexuality is. Me, sex is not something I have ever been interested in and don't really understand it well myself. I am learning I can't help but to ask. How did this happen to be my reality. It took some time talking to my therapist to feel good about it. I understand how confused someone new to the term would be. I found there is a overwhelming amount of information out there about asexuality. When I first read about it I was just bored to death it just droned on and on. This site, thank god states it simpily and that got my attention.

[m0rtal]

Actually, I just spent about 20 minutes reading scientific studies about this issue. I admit I only read 2, and within that tiny bit of research I found "scientific speculation based on observable recorded data" that there are in fact a range of possible precursors to asexuality, both biological and environmental. Are the scientists saying "x y z" causes asexuality? No. Are AVENites who speculate due to patterns they have seen saying that "x y z" causes asexuality? No. Does public speculation lead to and prompt scientific research? Yes. Seems to me like there's a good basis for speculation and its merits, so long as such is prefaced by a warning that it is not conclusive nor seeks to inform others in any possible way about who they are or how they should see themselves.

From Archives of Sexual Behavior (2007) 36:341-356, “Asexuality: Classification and Characterization”

"Of the 15 variables investigated, many differentiated asexuals from non-asexuals. The variables predicting asexual classification included gender (more females than males), older age, marital status (more likely to be single), higher religiosity, short stature, low education, low socioeconomic status, poor health, later onset of sexual activity, later onset of menarche, fewer sexual partners, and less frequent sexual activity with current partner. Analyses were also performed for each gender separately. Asexuality in women was predicted by age, socioeconomic status, education, race/ethnicity, height, menarche age, and religiosity. Asexuality in men was predicted by socioeconomic status, education, height, and religiosity."

The study surveyed 195 individuals identifying as asexual and a group of 18,426 individuals reporting sexual attraction to males, females, or both.

If this is what I found in 20 minutes of research, then I think it's reasonable that there's a lot more out there on various influences of asexuality. Influences can be varied, complex, and intertwined.

[Waterbottle20]

Agreed 100%. Speculation gives branches to explore... You may get lucky, and one branch might hit the jackpot. Or, perhaps you had a gut feeling about why you are the way you are, and you simply wanted to see if there were any studies out there that supported this. Finding a supporting study might just be the assurance you needed to "know" yourself better. If what you found was something that brings you confusion or dismay, then you can simply acknowledge the fact that nothing is guaranteed, and that there's many other reasons for why you may be the way you are, and you can move onto something else. As cheesy as it is: knowledge is power.

[Menschenfeind]

I think the problem with stating any sort of "cause" for Asexuality is that people begin to believe that all Asexuality is derived from the same thing, whereas, certain instances of it are a likely result of any number of things. While feelings of Asexuality may be the result of different biological or environmental factors, it does not necessarily mean that those factors will then cause Asexuality in people who experience them. People have trouble accepting multiple points of origin and would rather state that their is only one reason or one derivative, and due to the uncommon nature of Asexuality, as well as the importance placed on sexuality in society, people are more inclined to view its occurrence negatively, and are thus also inclined to assume that it is also the result of something negative. Unfortunately, my Asexuality is often attributed to confusion, abuse, biological deficiencies, etc, merely because of the prevalence of sexual activity in humanity and its emphasis in culture; I think these are common conclusions that will not cease to exist so long as people do not understand that different, to whatever degree, does not translate to "bad" or "incorrect". While societal advances have been made elsewhere in the acceptance of minority groups, it is much more difficult to accept a group of people that are contrastingly different to the majority of individuals, on a subject that is almost unanimously regarded the same way throughout cultures and societies.

Regarding the prominence of these topics on this board, I do not see how it would necessarily be negative, so long as the express intent of the poster is not to persuade people that Asexuality must be derived from a specific thing. In fact, so long as these discussions persist, hopefully, they can be addressed and those who believe that Asexuality is always a result of something "negative" can be introduced to other ideas. While perhaps no conclusive evidence can be found to explain the occurrence of Asexuality, and probably never will, I believe that many differing factors should not be dismissed, but rather, taken into account.

[Mr McJeffdejef]

Hi, I am new to the group and found your post quite refreshing. I did not know for a long time what I was or to be more accurate what was wrong with me(that was how I felt). Over the years many people have speculated that because I don't have sex I must have been sexually abused as a child. One "friend" even went around stating it as absolute fact. Needless to say, our friendship did not last long. It got to the point that I started to consider the possibility myself. It is terrifying as a young confused person to be told that you must have been abused and then supressed it. In a society that plasters sex everywhere it is troubling to not understand what all the fuss is about and not know why. Thanks for your post. Once again I am not alone in my experiences. :-)

[tavionte]

I agree that blasting the threads with "is asexuality connected with" whatever isn't the best thing for newer members (not counting myself since ive looked into facts about asexuality.) but we cant condem some people's curiousity.

[Sally]

While perhaps no conclusive evidence can be found to explain the occurrence of Asexuality, and probably never will, I believe that many differing factors should not be dismissed, but rather, taken into account.

There's no way to take those "factors" (even were we to consider them factors) into account, because this site is not a scientific experiment. All AVEN consists of is the personal experiences and/or opinions of those who happen to find this site and of those people, the ones who happen to create or read any particular thread, and of those people, those who happen to comment. That works out to be a subset of a subset of a subset, all completely random.

If what you mean is that people should keep discussing their opinions, that's fine. But framing it in any way as a discussion of what possibly causes asexuality, that's bogus.

[Guest]

In my experience, trying to find a cause is just the first step in trying to find a cure. It's that second part that I have a problem with.

[Waterbottle20]

In my experience, trying to find a cause is just the first step in trying to find a cure. It's that second part that I have a problem with.

I have mixed feelings about finding a "cure". On the one hand, people are given the opportunity to make more choices for themselves. On the other hand, if it's a choice, people will be reprimanded for making the wrong one, and what can be cured may be viewed as a sickness.

But what other people think shouldn't be relevant, should it.

[willowsnark]

Posting "is asexuality related to x, y, or z?" should be replied to with a single statement: "No one knows what causes any sexual orientation." That's it. It's that simple. Because otherwise you're stuck in a world of grey shades, and then there's the nature vs nurture arguments, and quite frankly I reckon we all hear enough of that from the outside world without rehashing it among ourselves. Let's just be reasonable, yes?

(please no fighting up there)

[5_♦♣]

If you look around here (the Asexuality section), you'll notice that we already do that. It's just that, some are rather sick and tired of doing so every time such a thread pops up.

[Vyanni Krace]

Heehee, oh Sally. ♥ Wonderful.

I didn't note that anyone had replied to your implied question that the cause of homosexuality has been found ... as far as I know, it has not. There have been quite a few correlations found, but nothing concrete. The most I know is that there was a correlation found with the female siblings of homosexual men being more fertile. *shrugs*

Gah. there's another thread talking about Asperger's and asexuality which has progressed to claiming that the cause of homosexuality has been "revealed." It quotes Wikipedia.

I should stop reading this stuff. Drives me nuts, and I'm not even a scientist.

Well I personally think that I was born asexual but my autism, asphergers and OCD has contributed to my complete repulsion towards the idea of myself having sex. So I guess there is some form of credibility behind that theory but I stand by my own opinion that people are born straight/gay/bi/demi/asexual or whatever else I missed and that it is not caused by some 'fault' or whatever. (Maybe its natures attempt at birth control/controlling the increasing amount of humans flooding the Earth? I dunno. :/ )

Like how people theorise that autism is some sort of illness or something while I believe that I was simply born 'wired' differently-maybe this alternate form of thinking is simply another branch of human evolution?

[dezdimona]

I don't mind those kinds of topics, as long as people aren't trying to be presumptuous and act like they know why others are the way they are.

Agree. It is up to the person to discover who they are and relate it, noone can say why about someone else but themselves.

[dezdimona]

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.

for free speach and a flow of ideas, we shouldn't or can't shut down the flow of questions. I know for me I tend to be ACE maybe because of something I do have medically, my body actually does not produce hormones, and I can't say that the past didn't play a role either. That isn't to say everyone who is ACE has a medical condition etc... but it actually really helped me explore possibilities actually. BUT It is a blessing for me to have a tendancy to be ACE, so what if there may be a cause in my situation? Doesn't mean that is the same for everyone. What is there to be afraid or ashamed of asking these? I avoid threads that I don't want to be part of anyways.. but they have a right to exist...

[richvidaurri]

Maybe because I'm either very dense or very lazy I take the view that the reason for any sexuality is identical to that for second marriages, i.e., the triumph of hope over experience. Asexuality, being, by definition, no sexuality at all, doesn't require any further explanation. Just praise the Good Lord above that you never have to be bothered by the whole silly matter.

[shockkkk]

Actually, I just spent about 20 minutes reading scientific studies about this issue. I admit I only read 2, and within that tiny bit of research I found "scientific speculation based on observable recorded data" that there are in fact a range of possible precursors to asexuality, both biological and environmental. Are the scientists saying "x y z" causes asexuality? No. Are AVENites who speculate due to patterns they have seen saying that "x y z" causes asexuality? No. Does public speculation lead to and prompt scientific research? Yes. Seems to me like there's a good basis for speculation and its merits, so long as such is prefaced by a warning that it is not conclusive nor seeks to inform others in any possible way about who they are or how they should see themselves.

From Archives of Sexual Behavior (2007) 36:341-356, “Asexuality: Classification and Characterization”

"Of the 15 variables investigated, many differentiated asexuals from non-asexuals. The variables predicting asexual classification included gender (more females than males), older age, marital status (more likely to be single), higher religiosity, short stature, low education, low socioeconomic status, poor health, later onset of sexual activity, later onset of menarche, fewer sexual partners, and less frequent sexual activity with current partner. Analyses were also performed for each gender separately. Asexuality in women was predicted by age, socioeconomic status, education, race/ethnicity, height, menarche age, and religiosity. Asexuality in men was predicted by socioeconomic status, education, height, and religiosity."

The study surveyed 195 individuals identifying as asexual and a group of 18,426 individuals reporting sexual attraction to males, females, or both.

If this is what I found in 20 minutes of research, then I think it's reasonable that there's a lot more out there on various influences of asexuality. Influences can be varied, complex, and intertwined.

This.

I think the reluctance to explore and discuss scientific studies makes this place look far worse than any is asexuality connected to X,Y,Z thread could.