Does "asexual" mean "not desiring either men or women" or "not experiencing erotic arousal?"

[AG31]

There's a thread over in Fetish and Sexuality that's not getting much traction and I'd love to hear from some of you intelligent, articulate AHers on the subject. Would you check it out?

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/confusion-about-asexual-label.1618445/

 

[AlinaX]

You have to distinguish between sexual attraction, where it's about seeing someone you feel a desire to be sexually intimate with, and sexual need, where you have a desire for sex but it's not specific to a person.

Asexuality is about not being attracted to people sexually. And it's a spectrum. Some asexual people react negatively to any idea of sex. Some find ways to enjoy it, but it can get complicated; I've seen quite often asexual people enjoying aspects of BDSM, since that doesn't have to involve other people so much. It's a spectrum also in the sense that for some asexual people, close emotional connections can sometimes lead to feelings of sexual attraction. This is demisexuality, not to be confused with perfectly understandable sexual attraction to Demi Moore.

It's a bit of a minefield, because moral society likes to tie in romantic attraction with sexual attraction with sex, in that order, and shames people for not following the rule.

 

[SimonDoom]

I can tell you what the term means to me. It may not apply to others.

I consider myself a sexual person. I enjoy sex, I want sex, I think about sex a lot, I like sex in stories and movies, and I consider myself a fairly kinky person. I dream about sex sometimes (more now in late middle age than when I was in my 20s, interestingly enough). I fantasize about it often.

I've known people who, as far as I can tell, don't really check any of these boxes. I'd consider them to be "asexual." They don't are much about sex a lot. They don't think about it. It's not a motivating factor for them.

One of the people in that other thread said he's into BDSM, but when it comes to the act of intercourse he's going through the motions. It may be that he just hasn't experienced sex in a way that is sexy to him. I wouldn't necessarily peg him as "asexual."

So, I would say one can be a "sexual" person even if one's sexuality is very different from others', and even if one's sexual desire requires a specific and unusual set of circumstances to occur.

 

[NotWise]

To me, asexual just means "not interested in sex."

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

View attachment 2394878

 

[AlinaX]

Pah, dictionaries!

There are places to go if you actually want to learn, and AVEN's a good first stop:

Many asexual people may experience forms of attraction that can be romantic, aesthetic, or sensual in nature but do not lead to a need to act out on that attraction sexually. ... For some asexual people, arousal (sometimes interchanged with “libido” in asexual dialogue) is a fairly regular occurrence, though it is not associated with a desire to find a sexual partner or partners. This could include, but is not limited to, arousal from hormone variation in a person’s menstrual cycle, or erections at certain times of the day. Some may occasionally masturbate, but feel no desire for partnered sex. Other asexual people may experience little or no arousal, often called non-libidoist asexuals. Both types are equally valid in identifying as asexual, as sexual orientation is about attraction and desire towards other people, rather than strictly physiological reactions.

 

[Britva415]

"No sexual feelings or desires" is an incomplete description. What's missing is "toward/for another person." Not all but many asexuals are into solo play.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

So they can feel arousal and they can masturbate but feel no need for a partner (apart from their trusty right hand). Voluntary celibates then, no?
Also, the idea that you can feel aroused but that the arousal isn't tied to any actual person or a specific fetish or sex act sounds plain ridiculous. What is it that aroused you then? Clouds and trees?

 

[AlinaX]

Clouds are hot.

 

[AlinaX]

I get so wet when it rains.

 

[Britva415]

Voluntary celibates then, no?

Orthogonal and not always correct.

Voluntary celibacy is not a sexual orientation, there can be reasons for it which don't have to do with being asexual or sexual.

Similarly, asexual people aren't always celibate, there's no law which says they have to be celibate and many who are in mis-matched relationships with sexual people do participate in sex even though they wouldn't really care if they didn't.

 

[SimonDoom]

Clouds are hot.

I've looked at clouds from both sides now
From up and down and still somehow
That cloud's got a nice butt.

OK, so Joni Mitchell I'm not.

 

[Britva415]

the idea that you can feel aroused but that the arousal isn't tied to any actual person or a specific fetish or sex act sounds plain ridiculous

Maybe, but, just because you don't experience it doesn't mean it's not a thing.

Asexuality is as valid a sexual orientation as gay is. There are still people who say "just plain ridiculous" when contemplating desire for the unique kinds of sex acts which can only be had with the same sex.

I'm not trying to lecture or shame you or accuse you of having a bad attitude, I'm just hoping that looking at it from these perspectives helps you maybe just kind of accept that sexuality isn't just one thing and isn't the same for everyone - and that calling any of it ridiculous is kind of ugly, just FYI.

You see what I mean? Like - would you say that to an ace's face?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Voluntary celibacy is not a sexual orientation, there can be reasons for it which don't have to do with being asexual or sexual.

I was being sarcastic with that one actually.

Maybe, but, just because you don't experience it doesn't mean it's not a thing.

Oh, I agree with that, absolutely. I am just saying that just because some people say they are experiencing it, it doesn't mean it's a thing either.

We also don't need to add a disclaimer about not offending each other. I assume we can discuss things without going there. I also can't judge whether my statement was ugly or not, I was just being sincere that it sounded ridiculous to me.
Once again, I'll go back to what you said: Just because I don't experience it, doesn't mean it's not a thing. Yet both sexuals and asexuals, we are all people and these ideas and concepts shouldn't sound so alien to me. Yet they do, even if we are talking about basic human instincts and functions. I can't take these things at face value just because some people claim to be like that. And science is all on the margins with these things.

 

[AlinaX]

I can't take these things at face value just because some people claim to be like that. And science is all on the margins with these things.

It's deeply illogical to expect that we all have the same human experience. The human brain is a fantastically complex organ, and as intelligent beings we are willing to accept that some people are naturally gifted at art, or naturally gifted at science, and so on, but as soon as we start saying that gender identity is not a simple binary that corresponds to anatomy, or that some people do not experience romantic attraction, then it's, "Uh oh! Mental disorder!" or "Make-believe! Bloody special snowflakes!"

If science is on the margins with these things, then the logical thing to do is listen to people. If it's just one person who says, "I'm like this, different from you," then some scepticism may be called for, but when there are millions of people around the world all talking about it and coming up with language to describe their experiences? Well, scepticism achieves nothing.

 

[AlinaX]

The reality is that people are frightened of difference. We want to believe that everyone more-or-less thinks the same way, because if they don't, you get psychopaths and so on, and how can you relate to these people who don't think the same way?

The rules around courting are already complicated enough when it's just heterosexual men and women. Every time we add in new categories, we create minefields of, "What if she's a lesbian?" or "What if she's not a lesbian?" Or, "What if I tell her I love her and she looks at me blankly and says, 'I don't experience romantic love'?" Or, "What if she does love me but has zero interest in sex?"

People thinking in different ways from us is scary because we understand people by understanding ourselves, and when that isn't possible then people become dangerous, intentionally or not.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

If science is on the margins with these things, then the logical thing to do is listen to people. If it's just one person who says, "I'm like this, different from you," then some scepticism may be called for, but when there are millions of people around the world all talking about it and coming up with language to describe their experiences? Well, scepticism achieves nothing.

I beg to differ. Skepticism makes a lot of sense in our world. There are way more people who claim that, say, acupuncture cures all kinds of illnesses, that they witnessed an actual miracle, that they felt god's presence, a presence of a supernatural entity, and so on, and I regard all those cases with equal skepticism.
But unlike most of these things I mentioned, when it comes to sexual/gender diversities, science is not really allowed to apply proper scrutiny to all these claims and ideas. They are all far, far in the field of politics, and science isn't really allowed to go there. So yeah, I'll hold on to my skepticism whenever I think that my logic, critical thinking, and common sense are being stretched too much without scientific proof to back it up.

 

[AlinaX]

We make choices every day. We take things on faith, because it's impossible for us to know and understand everything. We accept, for example, that love is real, although I don't know that science has ever proved it so.

 

[alohadave]

I am just saying that just because some people say they are experiencing it, it doesn't mean it's a thing either.

If they are experiencing it, then it is a thing.

Do straight people get to tell gay people that their sexual attraction isn't real because they don't experience it?

 

[AlinaX]

Clearly gay people are just deluding themselves into wanting hot sex.

 

[Britva415]

I can't take these things at face value just because some people claim to be like that

I'm not sure what you mean by saying you can't take them at face value.

It kind of sounds like you think they don't mean it or aren't being honest. If that's the case, what do you think motivates them to say it?

If that's not the case, it still sounds like you're making it your business to say you're skeptical of their lived experience. What good does that do anyone? And by "anyone" I really do mean "anyone" - asexual people aren't served by it, non-asexual people aren't served by it, and I don't even know how it serves you, yourself, to say it.

EDIT nevermind, I see above where you do say you think they're not being honest. So answer the question: Why would they lie?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

If they are experiencing it, then it is a thing.

No it's not. A thing doesn't become a thing just because someone says so. You can't know if they are actually experiencing what they say they are experiencing, nor can we know if there is some specific reason for that, other than that being an actual thing. We could go on like this forever.

 

[AlinaX]

True, but you've just undermined the totality of human interaction.

 

[alohadave]

No it's not. A thing doesn't become a thing just because someone says so. You can't know if they are actually experiencing what they say they are experiencing, nor can we know if there is some specific reason for that, other than that being an actual thing. We could go on like this forever.

Why are you the one who gets to validate what someone else is feeling?

 

[Britva415]

No it's not. A thing doesn't become a thing just because someone says so. You can't know if they are actually experiencing what they say they are experiencing, nor can we know if there is some specific reason for that, other than that being an actual thing. We could go on like this forever.

Why go on forever? You could start and end with "just because he says he's conscious doesn't mean he is."

I'm not saying you can't ever question anyone anywhere ever about anything, but why question all asexuals everywhere? Can you point to even one person who says they're asexual while also giving you a good reason to doubt their honesty?