What's everybody's take on asexuality? (That is, not being attracted to anyone of any gender.) Is it a legitimate sexual orientation? Is it, as some medical journals seem to think, a sexual dysfunction?

Are asexuals "straight" or not? I know, classifications like these are decisions that people should make for themselves, but in many situations people are put under tremendous pressure to identify as either "queer" or "straight" - where do you fit if you're "none of the above"?

How do you define asexuality, anyway? At what point does a person stop being "not attracted to anybody just yet" and start being "not attracted to anybody at all"? Are sexual fantasies about nobody in particular somehow contrary to the spirit of asexuality?

So, technically, no, it is not an orientation, because orientation by definition is what gender a given person is largely attracted to. Asexuality is a term used to specify creatures or species which have no reproductive organs.

Are you asking about people who simply do not find other people attractive? Or people with low or nonexistent libidos?

So, I'd love to discuss this, but a different term really needs be used that does adequately describe what you're referring to.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

------------------
To the rational mind there can be no offense, no obscenity, no blasphemy, but only information of greater or lesser value.
-- Jennifer Diane Reitz

So, yes, I'm perhaps being difficult, but I feel one has to be very careful with unbrella terms, AND very careful as to what we classify as sexually "normal."

Is it normal for any person to have extended periods of their lives in which they are not interested in partnered sex? Absolutely.

But with something like this, I'd be looking at breaking it down a bit like this in terms of looking at what it really is or is not:

1) Do you have a desire to have partnered sex with someone?
1a.) Does that desire largely include one gender, the other or both? If so, then homo/het/bi, etc. Is it irrelevant as to gender? Then bi.

2) Do you have no desire whatsoever to have a sexual or romantic partner or any gender?

2a) Do you also have no sexual fantasies which feature another person in them in any capacity?

2b) Is this only sexual, or do you also have no real desire to interact with others in other sorts of relationships?

2c) Have you had any sexual trauma in your life, including sexual abuse, rape, or sexual shame?

In terms of the 2's, we may be looking at types of social anxieties, narcissiam, possibly even sociopathy in extreme cases,etc.

3) Do you have a sexual libido at all? Do you masturbate or have sexual fantasies by yourself?

If no, then there are a lot of factors to look at. Including the possiblity that some people just have very low libidos, and that in and of itself can make gender orientation basically irrelevant. In other words, if you aren't looking through a sexual interest at anything, you've no real need to specify.

There is an applicable paraphilia here, for those who masturbate, but do not have sexual desire towards partners, and that is autophilia, in which sexual desire is only directed towards the self. One would call such a person autosexual.

There are also the condtions of erotic apathy (an inability to experience sexual or erotic arousal under normally conducive circumstances), erotic inertia ( an inability to manifest sexual or erotic initiative or activity) and erotic revulsion (in which sexual or erotic activity is aversive and repulsive).

Hypophilia is another term that might be applicable in some cases.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

The trouble with finding the right fit really is that there are really two distinct things to look at: are we talking about someone who simply has no desire to have a sexual partner, and has no gender attraction in reality or fantasy (or an attraction to any other populace), yet still masturbates and has self-directed sexual desires, or are we referring to someone who has neither? Because the former would tachnically be autosexual. The latter could be any number of things, one of which may be hypophilic.

As a note, paraphilias are not considered problems. A paraphilia is a sexual definer which basically means someone's arousal is dependent on whatever particular conditions the philia describes. Paraphilia simply means by root "outside common sexuality or affection."

(But again, you aren't going to find either of those things classified as an orientation, because orientation really refers to gender attraction, not to sexual drive, lack of arousal, what have you)

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

------------------
To the rational mind there can be no offense, no obscenity, no blasphemy, but only information of greater or lesser value.
-- Jennifer Diane Reitz

I actually do not know of a single case of a person who was LITERALLY never attracted in any way to another human being who does not have some other base of attraction (such as attractions to particular practices or objects, attraction to animals, or who is purely autosexual) and who also has an otherwise normally functioning sex drive.

I'm actually happy to ask a few sexologists I know about this to see if they do, but I personally have never heard of such a case.

Let me dig through some of my books today and see if I can come up with anything. However, even if those cases do exist, they would not be the norm, and simply in being something rare, would be a paraphilia if specific. Again, in sexology, that really isn't considered to be a nagative term, but a way of defining attractions (or perhaps a lack therof) that differ from the most common.

IF that is what they are. Again, this all gets really tricky, because in order to even look at this, one would likely -- to be accurate and responsible -- have to check into a given individuals physical body and hormonal/adneral system, as well as looking into other facets of their behaviour and life experience.

It is a tough issue, and a very complex one. let me go dig around a bit today.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

I have a question. How does an autosexual person become aroused? What does he/she think about? I guess nothing.

Miz S, you keep talking about "attraction." May I ask what exactly you mean by that? Physical attraction? Emotional attraction?

Of course I recognize some people as being particularly good-looking (cute, pretty, etc.), but much in the same way as I think cats are cute and butterflies are pretty, and I wouldn't say I'm "attracted" to cats and butterflies. I also feel more emotionally in tune with some people than with others, but those people I simply call close friends.

I guess what puzzles me is why when a heterosexual person says, "I am not attracted to anyone of the same gender," or when a homosexual person says, "I am not attracted to anyone of the opposite gender," no one thinks twice about it, but when I say, "I am not attracted to anyone of either gender," I'm met with so much skepticism.

To answer some of your other questions...

I have no desire to have partnered sex with anyone. I have no desire to have a sexual or romantic relationship with anyone, although to me, the line between romance and friendship seems awfully blurry.

I do have friends, and friendly relationships with coworkers and classmates, and the like - I don't think the way I function in "other sorts of relationships" is anything out of the ordinary.

I masturbate. Rather frequently, actually. (It offers wonderful relief for menstrual cramps.) I don't really fantasize about particular people, but more about different sensations that I can't quite replicate on my own. I guess, then, by your definitions, I would be "autosexual," although it sounds really, really strange for me to say that "my sexual desire is directed toward myself."

Honestly, I looked into this all afternoon. And I could find NOTHING that did not basically talk about instances in which there were factors at play like depression, residual abuse issues, hypposexuality, or like another paraphilia.

That certainly doesn't mean psychology or sexolgy are infalliable. They aren't. But I can tell you that working in this field for years, I have yet to read about a case, or have someone write me, who literally has had no sexual, physical or romantic attraction to another human being ever who does not have a paraphilia from which living humans are excluded or irrelevant. It may be out there, but I have yet to find it. And obviously, the public boards aren't the right place for me to treat the two of you like case studies, especially when you've not volunteered.

So, I know I can speak for myself and say I am skeptical because I have not seen it in this way, in there being no emotional, sexual or physical draw to other beings. Bear in mind that wanting to be hugged or stroked, what have you, is essentially a sexual and affectionate impulse. if that really isn't there, then from what terms we have availaable, I would feel it best classified as autosexual or autophilia (which isn't bad, IMO, nor is self-directed sexuality lesser in any way), unless there was an actual AVERSION to others, in which case it would be a more complicated thing.

If there was literally no drive, that is much more complex.

But asexuality means no sexual organs or utterly devoid of sexuality. And it doesn't sound to me like either of you are saying that is the case with you.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

I love hugging. I hug my friends and relatives all the time. And it really doesn't feel sexual at all.

I'm sorry if I'm sounding defensive or argumentative - I certainly didn't come here to pick a fight. I'm just really surprised that the sexological conventional wisdom is so different from what my body and intuition are telling me.

I think the big reason I'd prefer not to call myself "autosexual" is that it places the focus on what I do when I'm in my bedroom by myself - things that I really think are nobody's business but mine. I'd really like to be able to talk about my orientation (or paraphilia, or whatever it turns out to be) without opening myself up to questions like, "How often do you masturbate?" or "What do you think about to get aroused?" I think "asexual" pretty well describes the way I act in the outside world, and 90% of the people I've talked to have no problems understanding what I mean by it. Nobody's mistaken me for an amoeba just yet.

Really, in my mind, the danger in calling not having a sexual partner, or not wanting one, "asexuality" (which literally means, "devoid of sexuality," or without sexual organs) is that it then says that sexuality only exists with a partner. And that is a very dangerous -- and really, disempowering -- thing to say. Children, for instance, are often autosexual. But they are not asexual, nor are they without their own sexuality. Same goes for celibates, same goes for anyone -- who for any reason or length of time -- is not sexually active with others, attracted to others, or even sexually active with themselves in any form (which is questionable, as sexuality is a very big thing that is a constant part of the psyche and body). As a former rape and abuse victim, for instance, and as someone who has talked with others, it is pretty common after that sort of trauma to go a long time (and in some people's cases, forever) without sexual partnership or a desire for it, or even masturbation. That doesn't mean such people are without a sexuality during that time.

Andf the line between what is sexual and isn't isn't very clear, honestly. Hugging or kissing or cuddling is a longing for physical affection. On some level, yes, that is sexual, though it can vary in degrees.

And as to how one defines one sexuality giving people a view into one's bedroom and inclining them to ask questions, I have to say honestly that any sexual identity does that... if you seem open to answering questions. In being bisexual all my life, very few people who were not have simply said, "Oh. That." They have often asked questions about things which are personal. But when you open up a discussion about sexual identity, that is what happens. If that is unacceptable, perhaps the best answer is, "That's personal." So, I suppose what I am saying is that for nearly anything outside of very vanilla or mainstream heterosexuality, people usually ask questions if they feel you're open to answering them. If it's that uncomfortable for you to do so, or discuss it, it may be worth looking more deeply at your own feelings about your sexuality.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

"If you're a bird, be an early early bird --
But if you're a worm, sleep late." - Shel Silverstein

quote:

---

Honestly, I looked into this all afternoon. And I could find NOTHING that did not basically talk about instances in which there were factors at play like depression, residual abuse issues, hypposexuality, or like another paraphilia. [/B]

---

So when you mention abuse, do you mean solely sexual abuse, or might other forms play into it as well? And if there's a possibility that depression or residual abuse issues might be affecting your emotional state in this matter, would that suggest the need for therapy of some sort or do you think it wouldn't matter all too much as long as you're fairly comfortable with who you are (I'm not referring to the depression itself - only its sexual aspects)? The thing is, I've never been physically or sexually abused, but I have dealt with more than a little psychological abuse as well as depression, and it's hard to look at who you are and identify a single causal factor for a specific aspect of your personality.

quote:

---

I have yet to read about a case, or have someone write me, who literally has had no sexual, physical or romantic attraction to another human being ever who does not have a paraphilia from which living humans are excluded or irrelevant.

---

Clym, as to what you asked, I'd say that no one is ever required to have sexual or romantic relationships or attachements to anyone else. I'd say that life without those could be as productive, healthy and enjoyable as life with them. So no, I wouldn't look at it as something needing treatment if it didn't make you unhappy and it was fine by you. I'm actually dating someone right now who was in a similar space for a lot of his life (mostly due to social anxiety, shyness, and not being able to see how others could see him as sexual) until this past year in his thirties. While he wasn't thrilled with that most of the time, it didn't rob him of a life, either.

In terns of abuse issues, no, I'd say it needn't be sexual. As far as therapy for abuse survivors, I'm pretty much a proponent of therapy for abuse issues, period, both professionally and on a personal level.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

quote:

---

In other words, that would be an aspect of social anxiety or avoidance?

---

Not necessarily - there are certainly plenty of people with Asperger's syndrome who do feel attracted to others sexually/romantically but find that it's complicated or made impractical or stressful by social anxiety/avoidance or lack of social skills. But then there are some people with Asperger's who report that they simply don't have that sort of interest in others to begin with.