Jump to content
Siggy

"Not Getting laid tonight?"

Recommended Posts

Siggy

"Not Getting Laid Tonight? You're Not Alone"

My rating: neutral to positive.

The negative is that she consulted an "expert". The positive is that she also did multiple other kinds of research, including going to a meetup. It humanizes asexuals well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

"reported that about 29% identified as male and 71% as female. No surprise there." :rolleyes: So much for not stereotyping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hollywoodjane
The positive is that she also did multiple other kinds of research, including going to a meetup.

Though it seems as if she went "undercover," pretending to be ace. I don't particularly like the idea of being treated - as one commenter put it - like a 50s anthropological experiment. I found some of the language and her inexplicable attachment to the capital 'A' less than ideal, but it does raise some awareness. I wish I understood why asexuality is such a hard concept for sexual people to grasp, but I suppose if I did, I wouldn't be asexual. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
POURRITURE

Poor poor users who got their UNs butchered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Olivier

I think it's an appalling article, for the same reasons as commenters on the article have already raised.

It flatly states that asexuality isn't an orientation, and, lacking that definition proceeds to offer others: asexual = dork; asexual = single; asexual = self-deluding sexual.

I really can't see any redeeming features of the article at all, I'm afraid, other than giving a link to this place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unbanned

As an article, I thought it was quite good. Humorous and well-written.

As an article on asexuality, it was a bit hit-and-miss. I like that she did her own research, going to a meet-up and speaking with asexuals as well as consulting a specialist. However, I didn't agree with everything this specialist said, and I also didn't like that analogy at the end (even though it was clearly a bad joke).

Some of the comments by what I'm assuming were asexuals were pretty poor. It annoys me when people get so touchy about their sexuality, especially when they are part of a minority like us. We should be projecting a happy, confident image of ourselves and not that of someone who has just given up on sex because no one liked them (which is what this complaining suggests). We need to be a little more polite and a little more patient with those who have trouble understanding. You can hardly blame them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiranasta

Oh : character, why do you despise me so?

Not a great article. There's nothing wrong with quoting an 'expert', but other perspectives should also be represented. They were not, at least, not adequately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sinisterporpoise

It was a university newspaper. I dismissed it as a Valentine's Day article and not really worthy of attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
carried in bags

imature journalism at best. I found myself laughing at it, rather than laughing with it. A shame fellow AVENites go bashed, but I suppose we will be "quoted" more and more ans the ace word reaches the masses. For a University Newspaper you say? I'm sure it has been read by some "geek who's eating a slice of cake" [sic] who may have worries with their sex/relationship life. They have a name and an exciting website to explore. Good luck with the Pulitzer, Liz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Henny

AVEN chat got a mention in the article! How awesome. (We always need more peeps in there, BTW). :P

This is obviously a small piece of the whole hour, but I can assure you that the rest of this conversation did not get any more exciting than what you’ve got here.

Ack, must've been because I wasn't in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unbanned

AVEN chat got a mention in the article! How awesome. (We always need more peeps in there, BTW). :P

This is obviously a small piece of the whole hour, but I can assure you that the rest of this conversation did not get any more exciting than what you’ve got here.

Ack, must've been because I wasn't in there.

I found that bit quite amusing, having never understood the whole "cake" thing myself. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AGlassRoseNeverFades
Can one self-stimulate and still identify as an Asexual? No, self-stimulation is a sexual drive, so they can not be defined as Asexual. If it can be used as a way of releasing their anxieties and attributed to stimulating a good feeling, they are capable of being sexual. I would not accept someone who masturbates as an asexual. An Asexual is someone who has neither conscious nor unconscious sexual desire.

Um, what? Masturbation has nothing to do with sexual desire! Just because we don't feel the need to fantasize or jump people's bones doesn't mean self-stimulation doesn't feel nice! Gee, maybe I'm missing the point here, but I thought asexuality was about a lack of sexual attraction, not a sex drive! Just because someone has an M.D. doesn't mean they're qualified to discuss asexuality. Who knows what this woman specialized in? Sure, she's the Human Sexuality Program Director at NYU, but that doesn't necessarily mean she's qualified...at worst it only means she understands enough about politics to get some strings pulled and secure a nice, cushy position for herself.

I sincerely hope this doctor's views aren't a reflection of what the medical community is really saying about us. If it is...well, they used to call homosexuality a mental disease too, didn't they? One can only hope they'll wise up with time.

Here guys, have some cake!! :cake::cake::cake::cake::cake::cake::cake: After all it's the only thing we ever talk about in our tragically boring lives! Thank god we have cake to fill this horrible, empty void inside of us since we don't have sex to fill it with!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spoonsfromdenmark

It is a very frustrating article but those interested will hopefully actually check out AVEN and have their facts set straight. At least people are beginning to be interested even if they miss the point and confuse the issue at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asexy Existentialist

It seemed a little dismissive to me. It also makes me wonder who the newbies in the chatroom really are... but the comments are nicer than they usually are!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Samael

The "expert" clearly knew next to nothing about asexuality. How quaint.

It very much seems like Virginia just guessed her answers because she didn't have the faintest idea what asexuality was. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Long Time Ago

I found the article to be a disappointment. It was rather dismissive but I can't tell whether this was from ignorance or intentional on the part of the author (I sure hope it was ignorance).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Theta Sigma

If they made the effort to join AVEN and go to a meetup, they could have at least researched more into asexuality.

LADY* (Demisexual): To be honest, I am more Asexual than Lady, because Lady has a boyfriend. This concept confused me, ‘an asexual with a boyfriend? How is that possible?’ But then I half-got it when she told me she was a demisexual. She explained that a demisexual is “someone who is Asexual until a connection is formed with a partner.” So I blurted “basically, you’re telling me that you’re just extra cautious and conservative.” She didn’t argue with me like I wanted her to, but agreed, “yes, all that. Which would make me a demisexual.” Then I asked her if she had formed this special connection with her boyfriend yet, she said she has. Get it girl. (Her heterosexual boyfriend and three of his buddies also showed up for Laser Tag later that night.)

Wtf even is this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
duckduck

all i really got out of this article is that apparently asexuals don't want sex, which is not true. and the whole pretending to be asexual thing, in my opinion, is kinda rude. i thought that this was going to be an informative article, but it just sounds like this person is putting us down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Olivier

If they made the effort to join AVEN and go to a meetup, they could have at least researched more into asexuality.

LADY* (Demisexual): To be honest, I am more Asexual than Lady, because Lady has a boyfriend. This concept confused me, ‘an asexual with a boyfriend? How is that possible?’ But then I half-got it when she told me she was a demisexual. She explained that a demisexual is “someone who is Asexual until a connection is formed with a partner.” So I blurted “basically, you’re telling me that you’re just extra cautious and conservative.” She didn’t argue with me like I wanted her to, but agreed, “yes, all that. Which would make me a demisexual.” Then I asked her if she had formed this special connection with her boyfriend yet, she said she has. Get it girl. (Her heterosexual boyfriend and three of his buddies also showed up for Laser Tag later that night.)

Wtf even is this?

Yep, she flatters herself if she thinks she "half-got it".

It's like saying "Why doesn't the moon fall down? How is that possible? But then I half-got it when I realised that the air bubbles in the cheese would make it float in the sky."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michaeld

"AVEN also allows members to form relationships with one another" - ha, that made me laugh out loud. Hmmm. Maybe the Admods should make a change to the ToS. No members on this site can form relationships with each other! I'm sure that'll go down well.

EDIT: OK I'm being a little unfair. I'm sure she mean "enables" by her use of "allows", not "doesn't prevent". Still that wasn't how I read it at first, and I thought it was funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The argument over whether or not asexuality is an orientation is just semantics. AVEN defines asexuality as "a sexual orientation for people who do not experience sexual attraction". The people arguing against us define asexuality as "people who do not have a sexual orientation because they do not experience sexual attraction". It's the same damn thing! Just a different way of wording it.

For example, if someone claimed to be neither Republican nor Democrat, but instead an independent, someone might reply "independent isn't a political party, you are just not into politics". It's very nearly same thing, just arguments over how to categorize it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Olivier

The argument over whether or not asexuality is an orientation is just semantics. AVEN defines asexuality as "a sexual orientation for people who do not experience sexual attraction". The people arguing against us define asexuality as "people who do not have a sexual orientation because they do not experience sexual attraction". It's the same damn thing! Just a different way of wording it.

For example, if someone claimed to be neither Republican nor Democrat, but instead an independent, someone might reply "independent isn't a political party, you are just not into politics". It's very nearly same thing, just arguments over how to categorize it.

That's actually a good analogy, because if Person A said to Person B who had an independent political ideology: "independent isn't a political party, you are just not into politics", I'd think that Person A was an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dante137

The article wasn't too bad, but it was wrong (at least in my opinion) on quite a few counts.

1) I don't think our chatroom was very accurately described. (I've found some very interesting conversations on there) And, she didn't show us anything that she posted to add to/influence the conversation.

2) This "doctor" was the only person she talked to. I'm glad she did do some research about this (talked to asexuals, talked to a professional), but I think she should have included other sources. And a little bit more from the asexuals, since our group pretty much had to define ourselves. You'd think we'd know very well what counts as "asexual".

3) I disagree with the doctor on the masturbation/sexual desire point. I think that you can masturbate and still be asexual, because, by definition, being asexual means not feeling sexual attraction. I'm pretty sure any human could feel sexual "desire" (by this I mean pleasure when touched in... *ahem* certain areas.) unless they had some kind of medical condition that prevented it. I believe most asexuals masturbate just because it feels good, not because they want to have sex.

Anyway, with that said, I think the article was actually ok. I think the golf joke was a little lame, but I guess it kinda made sense.

(@AGlassRoseNeverFades - I just had to tell you how awesome your avatar is! :D )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theo_tatertot

I was there (at the mentioned meet-up) and I have so many things I could say but I will refrain. I agree with the many people who saw problems with the article. The writer did say she would be working on a piece, I just didn't think it would be like THAT. I wish I had made more of an effort to talk to the writer one-on-one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AGlassRoseNeverFades

(@AGlassRoseNeverFades - I just had to tell you how awesome your avatar is! :D )

Thank you!

@tatertatiana - Did she mention you in the article? Which one were you, and did she at least get her facts straight about everything that was said between you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arne

Asexuality doesn't mean you don't "get laid". So there's already a misconception in the title. The writer may know it's not that way, but the reader doesn't. Asexuality is to be considered a sexual orientation (or rather more, a lack of one). Does this mean asexuals don't have sex? No. A lot of asexuals are celibate, but it is not an intrinsic part of being asexual. She clearly gives the definition, but then claim asexuals don't want sex. It gives a wrong idea about asexuality. It might be true for a lot of asexuals, but it's wrong nonetheless.

"To be honest, I am more Asexual than Lady, because Lady has a boyfriend. This concept confused me, ‘an asexual with a boyfriend? How is that possible?"

Having a boyfriend doesn't make you less asexual. Lots of asexuals have a sexual partner. This does not deprive them from their asexuality. Yes, I know that she is demi-sexual, but sexuality =/= behavior. There are asexuals who have sex.

I also have some problems with the doctor she interviewed. Mainly because of her ignorance concerning the subject. She clearly has no clue what asexuality exactly is.

But that's just my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thylacine

Re this: "The single NYU gal, who sugar-coats herself “independent” and “career-driven,” will enjoy her dimly lit dinner in the company of like-minded ladies tonight, who’ll split the check in shared sympathy and single-girl-solidarity. But only after indulging in their denial, as they realize the only type of cock they’ll have in hand this evening are their pink cocktails... " I find this highly insulting to working women everywhere. It sounds like, poor little dears who think they're independant but they really need a good f--- It's so condescending and patronizing it makes me want to puke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Talliver

Re this: "The single NYU gal, who sugar-coats herself “independent” and “career-driven,” will enjoy her dimly lit dinner in the company of like-minded ladies tonight, who’ll split the check in shared sympathy and single-girl-solidarity. But only after indulging in their denial, as they realize the only type of cock they’ll have in hand this evening are their pink cocktails... " I find this highly insulting to working women everywhere. It sounds like, poor little dears who think they're independant but they really need a good f--- It's so condescending and patronizing it makes me want to puke.

Yeah, this article bothered me right from the start and this is a big part of why. It's sexist as hell, for one thing, and for another, what about, say, lesbians? I doubt they're bemoaning their lack of cock. Or any woman who is not attracted to men, or exclusively to men. And of course, it's 'not surprising' that there are more female asexuals than males, cause, ya know, every man is obsessed with sex right? Ugh.

And the whole chat/cake thing. As someone who has been called boring and prudish for a multitude of reasons (refusal to drink, for one), including my asexuality, this is a stereotype I despise. Clearly if you're not talking about sex, you're not talking about anything interesting. Besides which, I think I've talked about sex with my asexual and demisexual friends more than anyone. I'm personally fascinated by it, and I know a lot of other Aces are as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asexy Existentialist

Re this: "The single NYU gal, who sugar-coats herself “independent” and “career-driven,” will enjoy her dimly lit dinner in the company of like-minded ladies tonight, who’ll split the check in shared sympathy and single-girl-solidarity. But only after indulging in their denial, as they realize the only type of cock they’ll have in hand this evening are their pink cocktails... " I find this highly insulting to working women everywhere. It sounds like, poor little dears who think they're independant but they really need a good f--- It's so condescending and patronizing it makes me want to puke.

Yeah, this article bothered me right from the start and this is a big part of why. It's sexist as hell, for one thing, and for another, what about, say, lesbians? I doubt they're bemoaning their lack of cock. Or any woman who is not attracted to men, or exclusively to men. And of course, it's 'not surprising' that there are more female asexuals than males, cause, ya know, every man is obsessed with sex right? Ugh.

What about people who don't want to have a cock in their hand? I mean, I'm sure there are some ladies out there who like sex but don't like to do that just as there are women who like sex but not oral.

(I'm only talking about hetero sex because that's what the author was talking about, by the way.)

Also, as an asexual, hearing that phrase "cock they'll have in hand" was personally disturbing to me. *shudder* My hands are not for that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glitter Spock

Asexuality doesn't mean you don't "get laid". So there's already a misconception in the title. The writer may know it's not that way, but the reader doesn't. Asexuality is to be considered a sexual orientation (or rather more, a lack of one). Does this mean asexuals don't have sex? No. A lot of asexuals are celibate, but it is not an intrinsic part of being asexual. She clearly gives the definition, but then claim asexuals don't want sex. It gives a wrong idea about asexuality. It might be true for a lot of asexuals, but it's wrong nonetheless.

"To be honest, I am more Asexual than Lady, because Lady has a boyfriend. This concept confused me, ‘an asexual with a boyfriend? How is that possible?"

Having a boyfriend doesn't make you less asexual. Lots of asexuals have a sexual partner. This does not deprive them from their asexuality. Yes, I know that she is demi-sexual, but sexuality =/= behavior. There are asexuals who have sex.

I also have some problems with the doctor she interviewed. Mainly because of her ignorance concerning the subject. She clearly has no clue what asexuality exactly is.

But that's just my 2 cents.

I agree with everything here, although, I'd like to mention that the author probably didn't title the article. I work for my university's newspaper staff, and section editors and copy-editors are responsible for article titles. The title was definitely written by someone ignorant about asexuality, but it probably wasn't the article's author.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...