Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most asexuals do NOT have some past "trauma" in their lives. It's simply the way nature 'wired' them.
Think about it like, say, sushi. For an asexual, sex is like hearing friends and family and pop culture raving about sushi and how great it is and how they can't wait to go out and have sushi again. For the asexual, sushi does nothing for them. Maybe they've tried sushi and they didn't like it, maybe they have no interest in trying it or it sounds gross to them. They do realize that they're in the minority, but sushi is not something that's important to their lives or that they spend much time thinking about.
Asexuality, by the asexual community is considered to be a type of sexual orientation; not a sexual 'disorder.' If a woman (for example) can't reach orgasm, there may be something going on with her medically, such as anorgasmia.
Sort of true but misleading. When Barry Goldwater was running for President a magazine polled well more than a 10000 psychologists about whether he was fit for office and overwhelmingly they said no. But this action instead of convincing the voters of the US that Goldwater wasn't fit to be president, it convinced the American public that the profession was entirely too politicized, so in the early 1970's the APA passed what was known as the Goldwater rule. After that Psycholgists weren't supposed to diagnose patients that they hadn't personally treated and going forward a diagnosis required that the patient experience clinical distress. Meaning if you personally don't think you have a problem, then there is no problem to diagnose, so that no one in the profession would ever again repeat what happened with Barry Goldwater.
So technically if a person doesn't have a problem with their asexuality, then there is no medical diagnosis because there is a lack the requisite clinical distress for a proper diagnosis. On the other hand if you think your asexuality is a problem for you, by seeking treatment now you have demostrated the requisite clinical distress and thus could be diagnosed with Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder (FSIAD) which is in the DSM.
Now the asexuality community may wish to classify asexuality as a sexual orientation, but that doesn't mean that that there are not underlying medical reasons that are the actual reason why someone is asexual. It still may be caused by endocrine disruptors, it still may be caused by changing hormone levels occuring around menopause or some other underlying medical factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florida2014
What % of the male population is asexual? My guess is very little, which makes her statement 100% true.
Quote:
An overwhelming majority of asexuals were assigned female at birth (86%), compared with 14% who were assigned male at birth.
But I see plenty of married men and women complaining their spouse isn't interested in sex anymore and there are no other problems in the marriage. Maybe these people were never very interested but because they were in love they thought they would always be ok with it, then found out they couldn't keep it going.
It reminds me of gay people marrying straight people and thinking they could keep it up but then they cannot.
We all should be honest with ourselves if we fall outside the norm in some way(s), there are always others out there who are similar, it is better than denying and then hurting others because we weren't honest with ourselves from the start.
It's more than being honest/not being honest with ourselves. Some of it is simply not knowing ourselves, or not even realize that you have a choice in the matter.
Some people go through life having sex because they believe it's something they're supposed to do or that they have to do, especially if married. They may not even consider if it's something that they actually want to do, or even like to do.
I kind of compare it to a man I knew years ago. He had been working in a field that I would have considered to be a bit mundane, but he had been doing it for over 20 years. I remember asking him, "So, do you like your job?" It took him about 30 seconds to answer, and he finally answered, "No. Not really." To him, it was something that was necessary, and it didn't really matter how he felt about it.
Makes one wonder: How many people are 'doin' the deed' simply because they think it's necessary? Something they're "supposed" to do?
If I had to guess, probably a lot more than we think!
Sort of true but misleading. When Barry Goldwater was running for President a magazine polled well more than a 10000 psychologists about whether he was fit for office and overwhelmingly they said no. But this action instead of convincing the voters of the US that Goldwater wasn't fit to be president, it convinced the American public that the profession was entirely too politicized, so in the early 1970's the APA passed what was known as the Goldwater rule. After that Psycholgists weren't supposed to diagnose patients that they hadn't personally treated and going forward a diagnosis required that the patient experience clinical distress. Meaning if you personally don't think you have a problem, then there is no problem to diagnose, so that no one in the profession would ever again repeat what happened with Barry Goldwater.
So technically if a person doesn't have a problem with their asexuality, then there is no medical diagnosis because there is a lack the requisite clinical distress for a proper diagnosis. On the other hand if you think your asexuality is a problem for you, by seeking treatment now you have demostrated the requisite clinical distress and thus could be diagnosed with Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder (FSIAD) which is in the DSM.
Now the asexuality community may wish to classify asexuality as a sexual orientation, but that doesn't mean that that there are not underlying medical reasons that are the actual reason why someone is asexual. It still may be caused by endocrine disruptors, it still may be caused by changing hormone levels occuring around menopause or some other underlying medical factor.
But again Shelato, you don't have an understanding of what asexuality is, so you really can't comment on the potential for asexuality to be caused by some underlying "medical" condition. While there's plenty of research on this subject, there's plenty more to be completed.
Maybe we should simply accept that not everyone wants sex...AND, that they're perfectly happy, if not HAPPIER in some cases than their sexual counterparts.
But again Shelato, you don't have an understanding of what asexuality is, so you really can't comment on the potential for asexuality to be caused by some underlying "medical" condition. While there's plenty of research on this subject, there's plenty more to be completed.
Maybe we should simply accept that not everyone wants sex...AND, that they're perfectly happy, if not HAPPIER in some cases than their sexual counterparts.
If someone is celibate and happy with being celibate I am fine with that, no one else is being harmed, it is there life so what do I care. But that isn't entirely the nature of situation presented here either. The OP was asking what are the odds of successfullly finding what she is looking for which for the OP involves finding the willing cooperation of someone else.
Now there are two distinct ways of addressing this situation for the OP. One involves searching for some guy who is in the asexuality community who is both interested and looking for what the OP is interested in (but that is looking for a needle in a hay stack, 1.7% of the population is asexual with a 86/14 female to male gender ratio), the other approach though is to talk to your doctor and figure out if there is an underlying reason the OP is currently feeling asexual and if it that is resolved, suddenly the OP has access to a much larger dating pool with a much more favorable gender ratio.
The second approach just strikes me as a much more fruitful approach toward actually finding a guy for the OP.
Right, in clarity, there are TWO components in question... Is there the clinical "distress" or unhappiness there, which might prompt a person to seek to change the situation, or no?
AND, they also need to not be violating others or doing harm to others. As we know there are some seriously disordered people in the world whose issue is only manifest and demonstrable through the experiences that others have with them, they themselves don't see a problem with it. A lot of the "personality disorder" spectrum of issues tends to align like that.
So one would optimally strive to be ethical to others, and true to themselves. In relationships, this can mean, too, the recognition that the autonomous needs of both people are valid and significant even when they do not agree, and incompatibility doesn't mean that one person must be objectively right and the other objectively wrong.
The right of an asexual person (for whatever reason that they are asexual) to not want and not be pressured into sex, is valid and should not be disputed. If they want to change that state of being, should there be some fixable cause underlying, that is on them -and only them- to determine.
But at the same time, the right of a sexual person to feel that sex is a very important part of their life and to not wish to give that up if there is an alternative... That is valid, as well. A person isn't a bad human being for feeling that sex is important to them, we all get to honor our own priorities.
Which is why it's important to do what we can to be honest with ourselves and others, and to negotiate relationships in good faith.
Of course, I do see such things somewhat differently from many. I am not wired for strict monogamy as a default, personally. I feel that it's always possible and perhaps likely that any two people might not always do a great job at meeting one another's needs in any of a number of ways. I knew a woman who had a need to talk through problems, to "process" them out loud (I share this need, and have faced a similar challenge to what she was going through)...and her partner found it stressful to engage in these conversations with her. Where it became a serious problem, was that not only did HE not want to talk about it, he didn't want her to talk with anyone else either. And she just needed to talk. Well, that relationship ended, as there was no compromise that could be found that let both of them be comfortable. And sometimes, that's the only answer.
Hell, when I was in my first marriage and long before finding the kink or poly communities or anything like that, I knew that I was not meeting the sexual needs of my husband and in a way I think it would have been a huge relief if he'd found someone else to have sex with. Especially if I hadn't been having sex with him at ALL, then I wouldn't even have to worry about STI risk! The only part that would have caused grief was the hypocrisy because he was forever paranoid that I was going to cheat on him, even though there was none of that afoot in reality. I told him more than once that he needed to know, if I ever caught him cheating I would be smug as no one has ever been smug in the history of smugness, just because I was so almighty sick of his insecurities and jealousies and baseless accusations and surveillance. But I was still trying to keep him sexually satisfied to some degree. I don't think I ever would tell a man that we would never have sex (at all, or in future) but that he was supposed to just embrace asexuality. Not unless he had presented himself as such to begin with. Which, as we've discussed here...is rare.
I think that I only know one man who has told me that he's asexual/romantic. Not talking about older people or anyone with medical causes who still actually has the desire - but someone who is open to romance but not sex. I know lots of unusual people of various persuasions...but I think I've only met one of those. But he is pan-romantic and not monogamous. So even then, not quite what the OP is hoping to find.
It's more than being honest/not being honest with ourselves. Some of it is simply not knowing ourselves, or not even realize that you have a choice in the matter.
Some people go through life having sex because they believe it's something they're supposed to do or that they have to do, especially if married. They may not even consider if it's something that they actually want to do, or even like to do.
I kind of compare it to a man I knew years ago. He had been working in a field that I would have considered to be a bit mundane, but he had been doing it for over 20 years. I remember asking him, "So, do you like your job?" It took him about 30 seconds to answer, and he finally answered, "No. Not really." To him, it was something that was necessary, and it didn't really matter how he felt about it.
Makes one wonder: How many people are 'doin' the deed' simply because they think it's necessary? Something they're "supposed" to do?
If I had to guess, probably a lot more than we think!
Well that's a big problem! I can understand in the old days or those from some types of environments where strict conformity is a way of life. But now with the internet and so much emphasis on different types of sexuality even from a young age, people really can ask those questions.
If someone is very limited in their thinking and never questions anything or the why or how of course they could be repressed in ways they don't understand. I'm not sure that type of person would be compatible with many mates these days.
I think things are changing, and people are generally open to new ideas and possibilities especially when it comes to self identity.
Think about it like, say, sushi. For an asexual, sex is like hearing friends and family and pop culture raving about sushi and how great it is and how they can't wait to go out and have sushi again. For the asexual, sushi does nothing for them. Maybe they've tried sushi and they didn't like it, maybe they have no interest in trying it or it sounds gross to them. They do realize that they're in the minority, but sushi is not something that's important to their lives or that they spend much time thinking about.
Yes, I actually agree with that. I don't know why I included trauma. Some people can submerge their sex drive because of past trauma but that's another situation.
Think about it like, say, sushi. For an asexual, sex is like hearing friends and family and pop culture raving about sushi and how great it is and how they can't wait to go out and have sushi again. For the asexual, sushi does nothing for them. Maybe they've tried sushi and they didn't like it, maybe they have no interest in trying it or it sounds gross to them. They do realize that they're in the minority, but sushi is not something that's important to their lives or that they spend much time thinking about.
Yes. I would also add that being asexual is like being hungry without an appetite. Or being in front of a feast with everything anyone could want, but you're just not hungry or have a taste for anything. The physical hunger is the libido and the appetite is sexual attraction or lack there of. Another way to explain it is to basically instruct people who are straight or homosexual to apply their lack of sexual attraction to a specific gender to all genders, and that is what it feels like to be ace.
Heterosexual: The door swings one way.
Homosexual: The door swings the other way.
Bisexual: Door swings both ways.
Asexual: It's just a wall.
Just wanted to add a little bit of humor in there lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork
@shelato -
Right, in clarity, there are TWO components in question... Is there the clinical "distress" or unhappiness there, which might prompt a person to seek to change the situation, or no?
AND, they also need to not be violating others or doing harm to others. As we know there are some seriously disordered people in the world whose issue is only manifest and demonstrable through the experiences that others have with them, they themselves don't see a problem with it. A lot of the "personality disorder" spectrum of issues tends to align like that.
So one would optimally strive to be ethical to others, and true to themselves. In relationships, this can mean, too, the recognition that the autonomous needs of both people are valid and significant even when they do not agree, and incompatibility doesn't mean that one person must be objectively right and the other objectively wrong.
The right of an asexual person (for whatever reason that they are asexual) to not want and not be pressured into sex, is valid and should not be disputed. If they want to change that state of being, should there be some fixable cause underlying, that is on them -and only them- to determine.
But at the same time, the right of a sexual person to feel that sex is a very important part of their life and to not wish to give that up if there is an alternative... That is valid, as well. A person isn't a bad human being for feeling that sex is important to them, we all get to honor our own priorities.
Which is why it's important to do what we can to be honest with ourselves and others, and to negotiate relationships in good faith.
.
Thank you for pointing this out sonic. While Shelato is not entirely "wrong" in his assertion, it still implies that a person who is not sexually active or is not interested in engaging in anything sexual needs to be fixed. It's like telling someone who is homosexual they need to convert to heterosexuality because that is what is familiar, "normal," and acceptable. The ultimate determining factor is the individual. Being on the aromantic asexual spectrum myself, I have been subject to these conversations many times with friends. They love to cling to things like: "How do you know you don't want it if you haven't tried?" "It's just a phase." "You have to meet the right person." "You should get your hormones checked." Even though I have NEVER implied or demonstrated that I am distressed by it. They just can't accept it. Imagine telling a straight person that they don't know for sure they're not homosexual if they haven't slept with someone of the same gender. People would throw a fit. To me, craving sexual activity or feeling sexual attraction seems like a burden, because we have no control over whether or not someone would want to share that with us. Going out looking for it (I.E. dating) sounds even more burdensome so why would I open myself up to it? I hope that makes sense.
Last edited by Auraliea; 11-14-2022 at 02:51 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To him, it was something that was necessary, and it didn't really matter how he felt about it. 
