<p>One of my friends from undergrad identifies as asexual, meaning she simply has no interest in having sex with anyone of any sex/gender, although she says she does want the companionship part of a long-term relationship.</p>
<p>To me, there’s no reason why asexuality wouldn’t be a “legit” or likely sexual orientation–if people can be sexually attracted to the opposite sex, the same sex, or both/all sexs, it seems probable that some people wouldn’t be sexually attracted to anyone.</p>
<p>It also seems like asexuality does a lot of “parsing out” of attraction–into romantic, sensual, sexual, aesthetic, etc., which is novel, but again, makes sense.</p>
<p>Does anyone know anyone who identifies as asexual or have any thoughts it? I know some people have their doubts about it given the general emphasis on sex, but like I said, it seems entirely plausible to me.</p>
<p>I’ve seen people go from homosexual to asexual to bisexual to a serious heterosexual relationship within say 15 years or longer.
So yes, I think there are folks who are asexual, but it also can be related to physical & or mental health.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure my roommate of four years is asexual. She doesn’t personally identify that way because she’s not big on labels but she openly admits to not remembering ever being attracted to anyone. She tried doing the boyfriend thing for a few months but was absolutely disgusted every time he tried to kiss her. The idea of sex is just repulsive to her.</p>
<p>I think it’s important to note that sex is not repulsive to all asexuals (covering both people who self-identify as such and those who have the label thrust on them). Some are simply bored by it. Some find it interesting but not in the arousing sense. </p>
<p>Some people have called me asexual. I don’t really think about my orientation/level of interest that much.</p>
<p>It seems legit to me – but it might also be due to a medical problem, such as low levels of certain hormones.</p>
<p>I mention this not because there’s anything wrong with being uninterested in sex but because if the cause is medical, there could be other consequences, like loss of bone mass.</p>
There are plenty of people who live chaste, celibate, fulfilling lives - asexuals, nuns, priests, consecrated virgins, or people who wait for marriage and marriage never happens. Back before society decided that sex is the most important thing ever, this was seen as a valid life choice. It is society’s business if someone spreads STDs, gets a woman knocked up and abandons the child, forces sex on someone, etc., but not having sex - especially in a world that is in no danger of underpopulation - is really not a big deal.</p>
<p>Which is to say, your college roommate doesn’t want to have sex - who cares? Even if asexuality weren’t “valid” (whatever that means), who the heck cares? I would be more worried about an asexual woman or a woman with a very particular sex drive who had sex that she didn’t want to have, just to fit in.</p>
<p>I think there is an infinitely broad spectrum of sexuality, and it can vary for a person throughout their lifetime.</p>
<p>So why not?</p>
<p>I find it unfortunate when people are pressured to define themselves according to someone else’s definitions, in both sexuality and gender identity.</p>
<p>One of my kid’s classmates self-identifies as asexual. He even put in in their (college) yearbook, which I thought was a little weird. I think he partly identified that way because there are a lot of gays on campus and perhaps there was a tendency to think that someone who showed no interest in the opposite sex was “in the closet.” He just wanted to make clear he wasn’t interested in either sex.</p>
<p>To be clear, I have no issue with her asexuality–in fact, I’m really happy that she’s found an identity that resonates with her, and like I said asexuality seems entirely plausible to me, as both a person and a researcher. It just seems like there’s a fair amount of scoffing about asexuality on the Internet, which is kind of baffling to me–how can you presume to know someone’s sexual orientation better than they do?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I find it unfortunate when people are pressured to define themselves according to someone else’s definitions, in both sexuality and gender identity.[\quote]</p>
<p>I have to admit, I find the general hatred of labels a lot of people have to be bizarre. Yes, labels have been used very negatively in some cases and shouldn’t be forced on people, but there’s nothing wrong with proudly and/or practically identifying with a sexual orientation, gender, race/ethnicity, religion, etc. In fact, it can really provide a sense of belonging, unity, and community to marginalized people. So, while labeling is an individu choice, I don’t think being anti-label is necessarily more progressive or inclusive.</p>
<p>Psych, I think asexuality is the new bisexuality is regards to being scoffed at. When I came out almost a decade ago, I can’t tell you how many people couldn’t wrap their minds around liking both sexes. Now, it seems pretty accepted and asexulaity is the one that people “don’t get”</p>
<p>I think sexuality is private, but everyone goes through stages when they have a low libido.
While you can be mentally healthy with normal hormone levels and still have a low libido, it can’t hurt to get checked out.</p>
<p>What I have noticed is a propensity for some people to latch onto a difference and use it as a club to beat others over the head with, if they don’t feel they are open minded or supportive enough. ** Everything** becomes about their sexuality or the lack of. It really gets quite boring. I realize that young people are often very egocentric, and can feel more comfortable if they feel they have a group to identify with, but most of us really don’t care who they are sleeping with or not sleeping with & focusing on that characteristic seems awfully one note.</p>
<p>It also reminds me of when they were little kids and were all about wearing their power ranger pajamas everyday- it was really important to their selfimage. But then one day they just stop like it never happened. Then they come out as gay or asexual and if there was a costume you can bet they would be wearing it.
Some then move on to where their sexuality is an important part of their life but as they become more secure with identifying as such, they no longer need to list it on their C.V.
I think you probably can be at one place on the sexuality continuum and in ten years be someplace completely different
But don’t beat yourself up when you find you no longer fit into the box that you’ve placed yourself in.</p>
<p>There are a couple of different types or definitions of “asexuality” being conflated on this thread. A person can biologically perfectly normal yet chose for religious or personal reasons to live a completely celibate life. They aren’t really asexual in the sense they have no interest in sex. They may well have a normal sex drive, it’s just that they have chosen not to act on it.</p>
<p>There is also a biological form a asexuality. In both sexes the libido is largely driven by the hormone testosterone, so having an abnormally low testosterone level can reduce or even abolish the sex drive. Also in both sexes, testosterone is produced by the adrenal glands, plus men also get a big bunch of testosterone produced by the testes. This is why biological asexuality tends to be more common in women than in men. If the adrenals aren’t producing much testosterone in men the gonads normally more than make up for it. Since they have ovaries instead of testes, in women this is not so. If a woman’s adrenal glands are producing little or no testosterone she may well have little or no interest in sex. </p>
<p>All this says nothing about sexual orientation, as in being attracted to the same sex, opposite sex, or both. That’s a completely different question. The hormone levels will affect how much interest you have in sex in general, not with whom.</p>
<p>^
FWIW, both what I’ve read and what my friend has said are at odds of sort with your definitions of asexuality. What I’ve read (keeping in mind that I’m not in any way an expert) is clear to differentiate asexuality from both libido/sex drive/sexual arousal and celibacy. Celibacy is seen as a choice to refrain from sex despite the desire to have it, where as asexulity is used to denote a inborn lack of desire for sex. Libido/arousal, too, is differentiated with the idea that one can feel physiological arousal without actually wanting to have sex. The whole idea seems to be that asexual people simply haven little or no desire to sleep with anyone, sometimes in spite of a a “non-directed” sexual arousal.</p>
<p>One of my close friends identifies as asexual. She can see herself being in romantic relationships, and enjoys hugging, cuddling, and holding hands, but the idea of anything more physical than kissing makes her very uncomfortable. She’s had her hormonal levels checked, talked to a therapist about it, etc - and finally came across the term ‘asexual’ somewhere a couple of years ago and decided it fit her well. She says the hardest thing is figuring out when in a new relationship to disclose this fact, as she doesn’t want to freak out a potential partner, but also wants them to know upfront that she won’t be having sex with them.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s right to lump people who CHOOSE celibacy as asexual. Both are valid, but celibacy has a lot to do with personal values and takes effort and self-control - it’s not just a lack of libido or dislike of physical intimacy.</p>
<p>For the record: I am well aware that being celibate does not mean that your sex drive goes away, and that asexual people are basically those without a sex drive. But the end result is that both groups make the very statistically unusual, and in our society, frowned upon, choice to live without sex. </p>
<p>My basic point is that it doesn’t really matter (for the rest of us) if this young lady self-identifies as asexual, or if asexual is “legitimate” or not (which seemed to be the question that the OP had); the end result is that she’s going to be happier living without sex. For some reason, if a college woman decided to have sex with near-strangers every weekend, no one would suggest that she get “checked out”, enquire about her psyche, or ask if it’s a legitimate sexual orientation; but a young, healthy woman who doesn’t want to have sex is presumed to have something wrong with her.</p>
<p>This entire line of questioning says a lot more about society than anything that comes of it will ever say about the young woman. JMHO.</p>
