On “sexual attraction” meaning and the difference between being asexual and non-asexual sex-repulsed

[Nogitsune]

@Skullery Maid: Except 1) I don't see any alternate definition that would "improve" things and 2) AVEN is not the entire asexual community so we'd probably end up with a split even if everyone here agreed that the alternate definition was decent. I mean, if it was an amazing definition then okay, let's try it, but every suggestion I remember seeing... really wasn't.

@Geo: How is attraction an external factor? The person's qualities that attract me are external, but not my attraction towards them. The problem with what you seem to be suggesting is that many asexuals also have sexual desire, it's just not "directed" at anyone, so to speak.

I've been thinking about this for a while, and here's how I understand the situation...

We can probably all agree that there are many reasons why people, both sexuals and asexuals, can be attracted to others (looks, personality, intelligence, etc.). When attraction to these qualities isn't coupled to a desire for sex, it gets classified further into many different types (aesthetic, sensual, etc.). When it is coupled with a desire for sex, however, we refer to the attraction as "sexual," regardless of what qualities the attraction is based on.

Is this a problem? Possibly. For one, you could say that the classification scheme itself is logically inconsistent. Different rules are being applied to categorize attractions on the basis of a factor that could arguably be external to the attractions themselves (i.e. sexual desire). For another, some sexuals may feel this is trivializing, oversimplifying, or otherwise misrepresenting their experience of attraction. Notice that "nonsexual" attractions are represented among many dimensions, while those that are "sexual" all get lumped together. Together with the fact that "sexual attraction" is often described in a very one-dimensional way, I can see why some sexuals might be bothered by this.

I don't know if I'm understanding things correctly, but that's what I've been able to glean so far. To be honest, I doubt that there's ever going to be a solution to this issue with which everyone will be 100% satisfied.

Hum, but shouldn't allosexuals be the ones to come up with ways to categorize the kinds of attraction they experience if that is the issue? What I see is to a huge part people telling us to stop using the words we came up with and work with because they help us, and a lot of talking down to us that makes it pretty hard to work on this together. The expectation seems to be that we just accept as definitions what we're being told by some allosexuals, even when it would hurt us. I use aesthetic/sensual/emotional attraction to explain what I feel because otherwise people don't get that I feel it while not experiencing romantic or sexual attraction, not because I think my attraction is somehow more diverse than or fundamentally different from what allosexual people experience.

[WhenSummersGone]

Though I think I've read a much better and detailed explanation of the issue with "desire" to replace "attraction" in this context before and I'm sure there are people who could explain it better than me.

The major problem is that attraction is an external factor and your definitions imply that desire for sex stems from this external factor, when in reality for many of us sexual desire is an innate part of who we are. It's the defining characteristic of our sexuality. Your definition is highly dismissive of that fact.

An innate desire for sex doesn't explain who you want to have sex with, that's where sexual attraction comes into the picture.

I think the point is that it's the desire that's fundamental to their sexuality, not the attraction.

Yes, I understand that part, but if they desire sex as Hetero/Homo/Bi/Pan that is sexual attraction. Meaning they want to share their sexuality, sexual desire, with someone they are sexually attracted to.

[Guest]

I don't know how to make this more clear.

DESIRE: The "Why" of sex

ATTRACTION: The "Who" of sex

KINKS/FETISHES: The "How" of sex

When someone wants to go out and get laid, they are experiencing desire, not attraction. Maybe they find someone they're attracted to, but maybe not. And even if he finds someone he's attracted to, she may not be into him. Nonetheless, he's going home with someone. Contrary to Ithaca and some others, this is not asexual sex... that's super super regular typical average plain old sexuality. Attraction had virtually nothing to do with getting our very sexual, very non-asexual dudebro laid.

Attraction is nothing more than preferences. A lot of asexuals on AVEN know which gender, for example, they'd choose to sleep with if they were to have sex. They have sexual preferences. What they don't have is any drive to do it.

Attraction is a destination. Desire is the gas. Get it? A HUGE amount of sex goes on every day all over the world that has little to do with attraction, but a lot to do with sexual drive/ desire.

[Lady Girl]

I don't see any alternate definition that would "improve" things...

Include the asexual aspects of desire and perhaps even behavior (and definitely how asexuals think aout these things). Sexuality does not exclude them, asexuality shouldn't either.

Definitions should help define what it is, not prescribe what people should say it is.

[WhenSummersGone]

I don't know how to make this more clear.

DESIRE: The "Why" of sex

ATTRACTION: The "Who" of sex

KINKS/FETISHES: The "How" of sex

When someone wants to go out and get laid, they are experiencing desire, not attraction. Maybe they find someone they're attracted to, but maybe not. And even if he finds someone he's attracted to, she may not be into him. Nonetheless, he's going home with someone. Contrary to Ithaca and some others, this is not asexual sex... that's super super regular typical average plain old sexuality. Attraction had virtually nothing to do with getting our very sexual, very non-asexual dudebro laid.

Attraction is nothing more than preferences. A lot of asexuals on AVEN know which gender, for example, they'd choose to sleep with if they were to have sex. They have sexual preferences. What they don't have is any drive to do it.

Attraction is a destination. Desire is the gas. Get it? A HUGE amount of sex goes on every day all over the world that has little to do with attraction, but a lot to do with sexual drive/ desire.

As an asexual I can say I don't have a sexual preference, and that attraction when someone meets someone they want to have sex with is sexual attraction. I thought this topic was about the destination not the gas?

I also think you are confusing libido with sexual attraction. Asexuals who masturbate are still asexual, their libido has no direction and that is the difference between asexuals and sexuals.

[shockkkk]

FWIW sexual attraction is currently defined on AVEN as "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them." Although some disagree, I personally can't see a difference between 'sexual attraction' and 'desires partnered sex' according to AVEN.

Whether or not that is the correct definition of the word is debatable (I personally think its bad), but I think if we take AVEN's definition of sexual attraction literally, it does a good job at describing what asexuality is.

[WhenSummersGone]

Although some disagree, I personally can't see a difference between 'sexual attraction' and 'desires partnered sex' according to AVEN

I can't see a difference either. If it's just sexual release then why would it matter who you have sex with in terms of genitals? A Heterosexual male could be fine having sex with another male.

For me genitals are the sexual part and I have no interest in anyone's genitals.

[Guest]

FWIW sexual attraction is currently defined on AVEN as "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them." Although some disagree, I personally can't see a difference between 'sexual attraction' and 'desires partnered sex' according to AVEN.

Whether or not that is the correct definition of the word is debatable (I personally think its bad), but I think if we take AVEN's definition of sexual attraction literally, it does a good job at describing what asexuality is.

But it also (accurately) states that attraction and desire are separate and needn't be mutually present or mutually absent. So riddle me this:

How can I experience attraction without desire, which everyone agrees is not just possible, but common, when the definition of attraction is "feels sexual desire"?

I mean, OBVIOUSLY the definition of sexual attraction isn't "I want to share my sexuality with you". Jesus. We're all attracted to all kinds of crazy nonsense that we don't want to share a nickel with, let alone our sexuality.

[WhenSummersGone]

FWIW sexual attraction is currently defined on AVEN as "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them." Although some disagree, I personally can't see a difference between 'sexual attraction' and 'desires partnered sex' according to AVEN.

Whether or not that is the correct definition of the word is debatable (I personally think its bad), but I think if we take AVEN's definition of sexual attraction literally, it does a good job at describing what asexuality is.

But it also (accurately) states that attraction and desire are separate and needn't be mutually present or mutually absent. So riddle me this:

How can I experience attraction without desire, which everyone agrees is not just possible, but common, when the definition of attraction is "feels sexual desire"?

I mean, OBVIOUSLY the definition of sexual attraction isn't "I want to share my sexuality with you". Jesus. We're all attracted to all kinds of crazy nonsense that we don't want to share a nickel with, let alone our sexuality.

Sexual desire on the basis of sexual attraction is you wanting to share your sexuality with that person. Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Also you seem to keep ignoring my question on why you couldn't have sex with anybody if sexual attraction doesn't exist.

[shockkkk]

FWIW sexual attraction is currently defined on AVEN as "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them." Although some disagree, I personally can't see a difference between 'sexual attraction' and 'desires partnered sex' according to AVEN.

Whether or not that is the correct definition of the word is debatable (I personally think its bad), but I think if we take AVEN's definition of sexual attraction literally, it does a good job at describing what asexuality is.

But it also (accurately) states that attraction and desire are separate and needn't be mutually present or mutually absent. So riddle me this:

How can I experience attraction without desire, which everyone agrees is not just possible, but common, when the definition of attraction is "feels sexual desire"?

I mean, OBVIOUSLY the definition of sexual attraction isn't "I want to share my sexuality with you". Jesus. We're all attracted to all kinds of crazy nonsense that we don't want to share a nickel with, let alone our sexuality.

I have no idea. When the new definitions came out, I asked how one could experience sexual attraction if they didn't want to have sex with anyone. Specifically, I was (and still am) baffled at how someone who "became horny and found people attractive but didn't want sex" would still be considered sexual under the new definition of sexual attraction. Some people answered, but I never found such explanations very convincing.

I don't think it's obvious to people who are very detached from how most people view sex (asexuals) that the definition of sexual attraction isn't "I want to share my sexuality with you". When I first read the definition of asexuality, I was under the impression that sexual attraction = being aroused by stuff. That doesn't seem to jive with how sexuals here describe it either. Most of us don't grow up pondering over what sexual attraction actually is, so its not surprising that people here will use the definitions on AVEN.

My point is that I think if we just cut out the middle man, and define of asexuality to be "someone who has no desire for to share their sexuality with other people", it does a pretty good job at getting to the lowest common denominator among asexuals.

[Notte stellata]

Also you seem to keep ignoring my question on why you couldn't have sex with anybody if sexual attraction doesn't exist.

I think LoC's post is somewhat relevant to this question:

We can probably all agree that there are many reasons why people, both sexuals and asexuals, can be attracted to others (looks, personality, intelligence, etc.). When attraction to these qualities isn't coupled to a desire for sex, it gets classified further into many different types (aesthetic, sensual, etc.). When it is coupled with a desire for sex, however, we refer to the attraction as "sexual," regardless of what qualities the attraction is based on.

It's not necessarily that sexual attraction makes sexuals desire sex with certain people; it can be other types of attraction: aesthetic, intellectual, emotional, etc. Just like an asexual can desire to cuddle with someone they're emotionally attracted to, a sexual can desire to have sex with someone they're emotionally (not sexually) attracted to.

Also, I don't think anyone is saying sexual attraction doesn't exist. They're just saying sexual attraction isn't the thing that makes one desire sex.

[WhenSummersGone]

Also you seem to keep ignoring my question on why you couldn't have sex with anybody if sexual attraction doesn't exist.

I think LoC's post is somewhat relevant to this question:

We can probably all agree that there are many reasons why people, both sexuals and asexuals, can be attracted to others (looks, personality, intelligence, etc.). When attraction to these qualities isn't coupled to a desire for sex, it gets classified further into many different types (aesthetic, sensual, etc.). When it is coupled with a desire for sex, however, we refer to the attraction as "sexual," regardless of what qualities the attraction is based on.

It's not necessarily that sexual attraction makes sexuals desire sex with certain people; it can be other types of attraction: aesthetic, intellectual, emotional, etc. Just like an asexual can desire to cuddle with someone they're emotionally attracted to, a sexual can desire to have sex with someone they're emotionally (not sexually) attracted to.

Also, I don't think anyone is saying sexual attraction doesn't exist. They're just saying sexual attraction isn't the thing that makes one desire sex.

Thanks for explaining this. I can agree that not everything starts with sexual attraction as there are many reasons one can desire sex with someone.

I guess what I mean is when they feel sexual towards someone it is sexual attraction, whereas asexuals don't feel sexual towards anyone at any point in a relationship. Nothing "turns me on" that would make me desire sex with someone, but if I did desire sex with someone I would say I'm sexually attracted to them.

[Geo]

Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Because it's an innate quality, it doesn't require any other conditions to be met first. In my day to day life I experience sexual desire over attraction by 50:1 ratio. If I were all alone on a barren planet I would still desire sex all the time, yet never experience attraction because there are no other people to be attracted to.

[WhenSummersGone]

Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Because it's an innate quality, it doesn't require any other conditions to be met first. In my day to day life I experience sexual desire over attraction by 50:1 ratio. If I were all alone on a barren planet I would still desire sex all the time, yet never experience attraction because there are no other people to be attracted to.

But that attraction is sexual when you desire sex with them. You have a preference on who you could see yourself having sex with right?

[Guest]

FWIW sexual attraction is currently defined on AVEN as "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them." Although some disagree, I personally can't see a difference between 'sexual attraction' and 'desires partnered sex' according to AVEN.

Whether or not that is the correct definition of the word is debatable (I personally think its bad), but I think if we take AVEN's definition of sexual attraction literally, it does a good job at describing what asexuality is.

But it also (accurately) states that attraction and desire are separate and needn't be mutually present or mutually absent. So riddle me this:

How can I experience attraction without desire, which everyone agrees is not just possible, but common, when the definition of attraction is "feels sexual desire"?

I mean, OBVIOUSLY the definition of sexual attraction isn't "I want to share my sexuality with you". Jesus. We're all attracted to all kinds of crazy nonsense that we don't want to share a nickel with, let alone our sexuality.

I have no idea. When the new definitions came out, I asked how one could experience sexual attraction if they didn't want to have sex with anyone. Specifically, I was (and still am) baffled at how someone who "became horny and found people attractive but didn't want sex" would still be considered sexual under the new definition of sexual attraction. Some people answered, but I never found such explanations very convincing.

I don't think it's obvious to people who are very detached from how most people view sex (asexuals) that the definition of sexual attraction isn't "I want to share my sexuality with you". When I first read the definition of asexuality, I was under the impression that sexual attraction = being aroused by stuff. That doesn't seem to jive with how sexuals here describe it either. Most of us don't grow up pondering over what sexual attraction actually is, so its not surprising that people here will use the definitions on AVEN.

My point is that I think if we just cut out the middle man, and define of asexuality to be "someone who has no desire for to share their sexuality with other people", it does a pretty good job at getting to the lowest common denominator among asexuals.

100% agreed

[Guest]

Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Because it's an innate quality, it doesn't require any other conditions to be met first. In my day to day life I experience sexual desire over attraction by 50:1 ratio. If I were all alone on a barren planet I would still desire sex all the time, yet never experience attraction because there are no other people to be attracted to.

Or, conversely, I could be stranded on an island with nothing but ugly guys and I'd still have sex with them even though they wouldn't otherwise be my first choice.

Food analogy: I can be hungry without any specific food craving, and even without a specific craving I still manage to pick out a snack. I have sexual desire whether or not it's directed at someone, and I can select a sex partner without feeling attraction.

[Geo]

Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Because it's an innate quality, it doesn't require any other conditions to be met first. In my day to day life I experience sexual desire over attraction by 50:1 ratio. If I were all alone on a barren planet I would still desire sex all the time, yet never experience attraction because there are no other people to be attracted to.

But that attraction is sexual when you desire sex with them. You have a preference on who you could see yourself having sex with right?

I want sex with people I'm attracted to, period. No matter what the nature of that attraction may be. Calling it sexual attraction is pointless. Attractive people are potential outlets for my sexual desires, not the source of them.

[Guest]

Attractive people are potential outlets for my sexual desires, not the source of them.

Well said!

[Geo]

Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Because it's an innate quality, it doesn't require any other conditions to be met first. In my day to day life I experience sexual desire over attraction by 50:1 ratio. If I were all alone on a barren planet I would still desire sex all the time, yet never experience attraction because there are no other people to be attracted to.

Or, conversely, I could be stranded on an island with nothing but ugly guys and I'd still have sex with them even though they wouldn't otherwise be my first choice.

Food analogy: I can be hungry without any specific food craving, and even without a specific craving I still manage to pick out a snack. I have sexual desire whether or not it's directed at someone, and I can select a sex partner without feeling attraction.

If you mean that just for yourself then I agree. I certainly won't do that.

[Guest]

lol yes just for me. My point is, whether or not you have sex without attraction is more a personality thing, or a preference, but it certainly doesn't make me asexual.

EDIT: Well not "just" me. I think this is the trait that gets ladies called sluts and men called manwhores. I'm not the only indiscriminate fucker, but that doesn't mean everyone is an indiscriminate fucker :D

[WhenSummersGone]

Why would you have a desire for sex if you don't experience sexual attraction?

Because it's an innate quality, it doesn't require any other conditions to be met first. In my day to day life I experience sexual desire over attraction by 50:1 ratio. If I were all alone on a barren planet I would still desire sex all the time, yet never experience attraction because there are no other people to be attracted to.

Or, conversely, I could be stranded on an island with nothing but ugly guys and I'd still have sex with them even though they wouldn't otherwise be my first choice.

Food analogy: I can be hungry without any specific food craving, and even without a specific craving I still manage to pick out a snack. I have sexual desire whether or not it's directed at someone, and I can select a sex partner without feeling attraction.

Then you are sexually attracted to males. If you say you aren't attracted to them you are probably not Aesthetically or Romantically attracted to them. The definition of sexual means sexual organs, meaning sexual attraction. Asexuals don't want anything to do with genitals.

[WhenSummersGone]

If you desire sex with a penis, you experience sexual attraction. If you desire sex with a vagina that is sexual attraction. Asexuals don't desire sex with anything so we don't experience sexual attraction. This may not be the best way to explain it but close to what I lack.

A penis or a vagina does nothing for me. When we say sex it refers to genitals, not just looks.

If a person can seek out any penis or vagina for their sexual needs/desires they are sexual, they experience sexual attraction, regardless of whether they are "attracted" to them or not.

[Guest]

Nogitsune, if you're still reading... I'm curious as to which types of attraction/ which situations you experience the most cognitive pushback about. My guess is that people are most likely to tell you you're feeling romantic attraction when you're not. I think understanding that you can love someone without wanting sex is easier than understanding that you can love someone aromantically. Anyway, I'm curious as to your experience.

[Lady Girl]

If you desire sex with a penis, you experience sexual attraction. If you desire sex with a vagina that is sexual attraction. Asexuals don't desire sex with anything so we don't experience sexual attraction. This may not be the best way to explain it but close to what I lack.

A penis or a vagina does nothing for me. When we say sex it refers to genitals, not just looks.

If a person can seek out any penis or vagina for their sexual needs/desires they are sexual, they experience sexual attraction, regardless of whether they are "attracted" to them or not.

I'm pretty sure most sexual people would not agree that seeking out sex with genitals is sexual attraction. Many people seek a sexual experience, a sharing of good feelings, sometimes a sense of bonding through the act. There's just way more to sex than genitals, whether we are talking about the sex of a person or the act. It seems there is to me anyway...

Also, I wouldn't agree with the statement that someone who wants to have sex with someone they are not attracted to is experiencing sexual attraction. I would call that wanting to have sex with someone for whom you don't experience sexual attraction. A person doesn't have to be a slut to go through that either...early in my marriage I wasn't highly attracted in a sexual way to my husband, but as time went on, I grew to love him (and sex with him) and developed what I would call sexual attraction. I imagine that this scenario has happened to more people than just me.

[WhenSummersGone]

If you desire sex with a penis, you experience sexual attraction. If you desire sex with a vagina that is sexual attraction. Asexuals don't desire sex with anything so we don't experience sexual attraction. This may not be the best way to explain it but close to what I lack.

A penis or a vagina does nothing for me. When we say sex it refers to genitals, not just looks.

If a person can seek out any penis or vagina for their sexual needs/desires they are sexual, they experience sexual attraction, regardless of whether they are "attracted" to them or not.

I'm pretty sure most sexual people would not agree that seeking out sex with genitals is sexual attraction. Many people seek a sexual experience, a sharing of good feelings, sometimes a sense of bonding through the act. There's just way more to sex than genitals, whether we are talking about the sex of a person or the act. It seems there is to me anyway...

Also, I wouldn't agree with the statement that someone who wants to have sex with someone they are not attracted to is experiencing sexual attraction. I would call that wanting to have sex with someone for whom you don't experience sexual attraction. A person doesn't have to be a slut to go through that either...early in my marriage I wasn't highly attracted in a sexual way to my husband, but as time went on, I grew to love him (and sex with him) and developed what I would call sexual attraction. I imagine that this scenario has happened to more people than just me.

Genitals are part of the act though, a very big part. How can one have sex without genitals? Why does one prefer a penis over a vagina or vice versa? If your husband had a sex change would that bother you? It shouldn't based on what you're saying.

[Lady Girl]

Genitals are part of the act though. How can one have sex without genitals? Why does one prefer a penis over a vagina or vice versa? If your husband had a sex change would that bother you? It shouldn't based on what you're saying.

There's more to it than that is what I said. They are part of it, but not the only thing. Sexual people don't think they are having sex with genitals. They think they are having sex with people or a person, sharing an experience, etc. They happen to have one or the other, but if you look up sexual attraction, most definitions include smell, movements, appearance, and the list goes on. Usually (since people often wear clothes), we don't base our attractions, sexual or otherwise, on genitals. We take it for granted that they will be part of the experience.

[Guest]

we don't base our attractions, sexual or otherwise, on genitals.

Lies, all lies I tell you!

[WhenSummersGone]

Genitals are part of the act though. How can one have sex without genitals? Why does one prefer a penis over a vagina or vice versa? If your husband had a sex change would that bother you? It shouldn't based on what you're saying.

There's more to it than that is what I said. They are part of it, but not the only thing. Sexual people don't think they are having sex with genitals. They think they are having sex with people or a person, sharing an experience, etc. They happen to have one or the other, but if you look up sexual attraction, most definitions include smell, movements, appearance, and the list goes on. Usually (since people often wear clothes), we don't base our attractions, sexual or otherwise, on genitals. We take it for granted that they will be part of the experience.

I can see what you mean, definitely, but how is that different from being in a relationship with a transgendered guy or girl?

[Lady Girl]

Genitals are part of the act though. How can one have sex without genitals? Why does one prefer a penis over a vagina or vice versa? If your husband had a sex change would that bother you? It shouldn't based on what you're saying.

There's more to it than that is what I said. They are part of it, but not the only thing. Sexual people don't think they are having sex with genitals. They think they are having sex with people or a person, sharing an experience, etc. They happen to have one or the other, but if you look up sexual attraction, most definitions include smell, movements, appearance, and the list goes on. Usually (since people often wear clothes), we don't base our attractions, sexual or otherwise, on genitals. We take it for granted that they will be part of the experience.

I can see what you mean, definitely, but how is that different from being in a relationship with a transgendered guy or girl?

Since I'm heterosexual and cisfemale, I'm going to say that the portion I take for granted is how it's different. As I said, they are part of it, but the sexual experience is with the person...I would think that transgendered people might agree with me on this.

[WhenSummersGone]

Genitals are part of the act though. How can one have sex without genitals? Why does one prefer a penis over a vagina or vice versa? If your husband had a sex change would that bother you? It shouldn't based on what you're saying.

There's more to it than that is what I said. They are part of it, but not the only thing. Sexual people don't think they are having sex with genitals. They think they are having sex with people or a person, sharing an experience, etc. They happen to have one or the other, but if you look up sexual attraction, most definitions include smell, movements, appearance, and the list goes on. Usually (since people often wear clothes), we don't base our attractions, sexual or otherwise, on genitals. We take it for granted that they will be part of the experience.

I can see what you mean, definitely, but how is that different from being in a relationship with a transgendered guy or girl?

Since I'm heterosexual and cisfemale, I'm going to say that the portion I take for granted is how it's different. As I said, they are part of it, but the sexual experience is with the person...I would think that transgendered people might agree with me on this.

I think the only thing I don't understand is why sex with a male over sex with a female?

Example:

If you dated someone who calls himself male, and who dressed male, but later found out after a long connection has been built that he has a vagina would that bother you?

It wouldn't bother me at all as an asexual, as I don't want sex with anyone.