"Asexuality" by itself is not a true orientation. It is merely a level of sexual drive.
1846 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Davis, California
Offline
Posted 7/26/09 , edited 7/26/09
When many people(Including myself at one time) first heard of the concept of "Asexuality" they immediately think the common misconception that it means that an individual has no attraction whatsoever to any person. They think that people who are asexual cannot love or are not interested in a relationship because they lack sex drive(i.e They automatically think any asexual person is an "Aromantic asexual"). While there is some truth to that(Proven by the existence of "Aromantic asexuals"), it is not entirely so. In fact, most asexuals are still interested in forming an relationship and getting married. "How so?" You may ask? Actually the answer is not as complicated as you think.

According to AVEN, an organization for asexual people, an asexual is someone who does not experience sexual attraction to either gender.However there is a difference between a sexual attraction to someone and an emotional and/or general attraction to someone.Asexuals who are interested in relationships tend to have the latter type of attraction to other people. AVENwiki said this about the secondary attraction most asexuals feel:

"Asexual people have the same emotional needs as anyone else, and like in the sexual community we vary widely in how we fulfill those needs. Some asexual people are happier on their own, others are happiest with a group of close friends. Other asexual people have a desire to form more intimate romantic relationships, and will date and seek long-term partnerships. Asexual people are just as likely to date sexual people as we are to date each other.

Sexual or nonsexual, all relationships are made up of the same basic stuff. Communication, closeness, fun, humor, excitement and trust all happen just as much in sexual relationships as in nonsexual ones. Unlike sexual people, asexual people are given few expectations about the way that our intimate relationships will work. Figuring out how to flirt, to be intimate, or to be monogamous in a nonsexual relationships can be challenging, but free of sexual expectations we can form relationships in ways that are grounded in our individual needs and desires."

According to this quote, it seems to me that Asexuality by itself is seen as more of a level of sex drive than an actual orientation. This is further proven by Asexuals who alternatively referred themselves by these following orientation labels: "Heteroromantic asexual, Homoromantic asexual, Biromantic asexual, Panromantic asexual, and Aromantic asexual. According to AVEN, the following definitions are:

Heteroromantic asexual(Alias Straight-asexual): A person who is romantically attracted to a member of the opposite sex. Hetero-romantic asexuals seek romantic relationships for a variety of reasons, including companionship, affection, and intimacy. However, they do not desire sex with their romantic partner.

Homoromantic asexual(Alias Gay-asexual):A person who is romantically attracted to a member of the same sex. Homo-romantic asexuals seek romantic relationships for a variety of reasons, including companionship, affection, and intimacy. However, they do not desire sex with their romantic partner.

Biromantic asexual(Alias Bi-asexual): A person who is romantically attracted to members of both sexes. Bi-romantic asexuals seek romantic relationships for a variety of reasons, including companionship, affection, and intimacy. However, they do not desire sex with their romantic partner.

Panromantic asexual(Alias Pan-asexual):A person who is romantically attracted to others but is not limited by the other's sex or gender. Similar to bi-romantic except that it includes genders beyond man/male and woman/female including transgender and third gender. Someone panromantic versus bi-romantic will tend to feel that their partner's gender does little towhat most people stereo t define their relationship. Often someone identifying as bi-romantic is also pan-romantic but pan-romantic is much less known or understand as a term and simply less common. The sexual counterpart to pan-romantic is pansexual.

Aromantic asexual: There is no concrete definition for "aromantic". Some people think of it as the lack of romantic attraction, whereas others define it as the lack of desire to be in a romantic relationship. (Of course this last label is what most people stereotypically think all asexuals are).

To me it all makes sense. There is indeed a difference between liking someone in a general sense and just wanting to have sex with them. In celibate relationships, there are people who like each on the basis of other matters other than sex. Just because you are in a relantionship doesn't mean that that you had and/or want to have sex with your partner. I have known couples my age who were together for several years and NOT ONCE have they considered sex as an option.

Moreover, it also doesn't make sense to me that Asexuality is treated as a seperate orientation when it reality, many people who claimed they are asexual still label themselves as "Gay, straight, or bi"(The only difference being is that they are not interested in a SEXUAL relationship with their respective partners. They only want companionship and romanticism in a relationship). To me, asexuality is more of a direct antithesis to "hypersexuality" or a libido" than an orientation on itself considering the variations of attraction within people who lack sex drive.

As you can see, orientation and human attraction is a lot more intricate than most people think. Asexuality does not mean that you cannot love or that you have no attraction to another person at all. Asexuality just means you lack sexual attraction. It does not mean that you lack any sort of romantic of loving atttraction to someone. It just means you have no interest in having sex be it that you are straight, gay, bi, etc..That being said, I see Asexuality as more of lack of sexual drive and a secondary aspect of an orientation rather than an orientation by itself.

End rant.


Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
114
Offline
Posted 7/29/09 , edited 7/29/09
Sexual orientation is determined by the sex or sexes you are romantically, physically, emotionally, and sexually attracted to.

So you're right.

Asexuality would be a sexual orientation if sexual orientation was just dependent on sexual attraction, but it's not. If all asexuality describes is a person's sexual attraction, then there are other aspects of sexual orientation that it doesn't define which means it can't be considered a sexual orientation on it's own.
1846 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Davis, California
Offline
Posted 7/30/09

Yei wrote:

Sexual orientation is determined by the sex or sexes you are romantically, physically, emotionally, and sexually attracted to.

So you're right.

Asexuality would be a sexual orientation if sexual orientation was just dependent on sexual attraction, but it's not. If all asexuality describes is a person's sexual attraction, then there are other aspects of sexual orientation that it doesn't define which means it can't be considered a sexual orientation on it's own.


That's my point. If many asexuals still label themselves as people who are gay, straight, or bi, then it doesn't make sense to me if it's seperate orientation. I think if you have zero attraction in both romantic and sexual sense, then people should refer to themselves as "Aromantic asexual" to eliminate confusion within Asexuality itself. as being asexual doesn't automatically mean you can't be attracted to someone over all.

I think the problem is that society is way too focused on sex. Because of this emphasis on sex, many people get the false impression that it equals love and the that only was you can love another individual is if you sleep with them. I think if society just realize they are seperate entities, misconceptions would be eliminated on many levels.
Posted 7/30/09
I would rather be considered/called in a "platonic relationship" rather than "asexual relationship."

It sounds better to me, that's all.



Posted 7/31/09
No crap. Not like you had to write all that stuff to make that point. I don't think anyone's actually gonna read it.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
114
Offline
Posted 7/31/09

Kebadatta wrote:

No crap. Not like you had to write all that stuff to make that point. I don't think anyone's actually gonna read it.


you always make the best contributions to Extended Discussion lol
1846 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Davis, California
Offline
Posted 7/31/09 , edited 7/31/09

Kebadatta wrote:

No crap. Not like you had to write all that stuff to make that point. I don't think anyone's actually gonna read it.


Evidently there are people who read it judging by the number of views this topic has and some people commenting on it. Please don't exaggerate.

Judging by the number of misconceptions people have about asexuals, I don't think my point is THAT obvious to most people. Also, it's "No shit" not "No crap."Please refrain from making euphemisms.It just makes you look like a pussy.

Finally, I wrote the topic to express my own opinions, not necessarily for other people to comment on.Especially not inane comments like yours that contribute nothing to the topic at hand.

I suggest that you stop being such a troll. It makes you look immature and idiotic.

Have a good day.
1846 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Davis, California
Offline
Posted 7/31/09 , edited 8/1/09

kyoukoujin wrote:

I would rather be considered/called in a "platonic relationship" rather than "asexual relationship."

It sounds better to me, that's all.





I take it you are an asexual?
1846 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Davis, California
Offline
Posted 8/1/09 , edited 8/1/09

Yei wrote:


Kebadatta wrote:

No crap. Not like you had to write all that stuff to make that point. I don't think anyone's actually gonna read it.


you always make the best contributions to Extended Discussion lol


If that's his "best contribution," I hate to see his worse lol.
Posted 8/1/09

QuasimodoSunday wrote:


Kebadatta wrote:

No crap. Not like you had to write all that stuff to make that point. I don't think anyone's actually gonna read it.


Evidently there are people who read it judging by the number of views this topic has and some people commenting on it. Please don't exaggerate.

Judging by the number of misconceptions people have about asexuals, I don't think my point is THAT obvious to most people. Also, it's "No shit" not "No crap."Please refrain from making euphemisms.It just makes you look like a pussy.

Finally, I wrote the topic to express my own opinions, not necessarily for other people to comment on.Especially not inane comments like yours that contribute nothing to the topic at hand.

I suggest that you stop being such a troll. It makes you look immature and idiotic.

Have a good day.


I wasn't trolling, just expressing how I feel about the topic and thread, sirrr.

Misconceptions? People just plain old don't know what it actually means, I'm just surprised you could even write so much about that. I'd rather say no crap cos I personally don't like swearing that much. =] Both terms are slang, anyways.

Have a SUPER day. : D
Posted 8/1/09

QuasimodoSunday wrote:


kyoukoujin wrote:

I would rather be considered/called in a "platonic relationship" rather than "asexual relationship."

It sounds better to me, that's all.





I take it you are an asexual?


Nope. I have natural, normal urges.
There's also this called suppression.

I have crushes here and there, but, eventually, they fade away.






I'm still cute though.
Is it a sin to fall in love with oneself? lol j/k joke
Posted 8/1/09

QuasimodoSunday wrote:


Kebadatta wrote:

No crap. Not like you had to write all that stuff to make that point. I don't think anyone's actually gonna read it.


Evidently there are people who read it judging by the number of views this topic has...


Some/most of the views are mines. The thread being displayed for my webpage doesn't load up completely, so I have to refresh it several times.

Sorry for misleading.
1846 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Davis, California
Offline
Posted 8/3/09

kyoukoujin wrote:


QuasimodoSunday wrote:


kyoukoujin wrote:

I would rather be considered/called in a "platonic relationship" rather than "asexual relationship."

It sounds better to me, that's all.





I take it you are an asexual?


Nope. I have natural, normal urges.
There's also this called suppression.

I have crushes here and there, but, eventually, they fade away.






I'm still cute though.
Is it a sin to fall in love with oneself? lol j/k joke


Well, you can be asexual and still have crushes. You just don't want to "do it."

But you are saying that you are celibate which is something I would recommend in a relationship if you are a sexual person(And no I'm not religious)

And as for your end comment, I guess it what all depend on your definition of "love" haha.

You must be logged in to post.