Can one be asexual and gay at the same time?

[hh5]

Its sounds fine to have a 4th Sexuality -> Sex is OFF and its non-sexual interest specific

 

Its better than calling someone plantonic and it allows other people to celebrate who they are

Lets just hope there isn't a 5th

 

 

www.asexuality.org

 

 

From the website:

 

A lot of effort has gone into trying to get

[Myk]

[unnecessarily dramatic voice] Can't we all just get along!!! [/unnecessarily dramatic voice]

[clumber]

Nope, that was the response.

Take the hint that I'm really not interested in anything you have to say, which should have been made clear the last time you mouthed off at me and by my lack of response to you in this thread. I don't know what you want from me, but you ain't getting it. You're not smart, you're not clever, and you're not intimidating but I am pretty tired of you trailing me.

 

If you respond to another post I make, including this one, insulting me again or not, I'm reporting your pathetic ass for harassment. Take this as my official warning to you.

 

I saw an interesting discussion and gave my opinion, I'm not entirely certain why you think that means I'm stalking you.

 

 

 

[unnecessarily dramatic voice] Can't we all just get along!!! [/unnecessarily dramatic voice]

 

[dramatic voice] No, someone has to sacrifice themselves meaningfully, thus reminding us how much we really need each other. [/dramatic voice]

 

 

Martin

[hh5]

[unnecessarily dramatic voice] Can't we all just get along!!! [/unnecessarily dramatic voice]

 

I guess dolphins and other animals can

 

Man can't

[clumber]

I guess dolphins and other animals can

 

Man can't

 

 

I don't know.... some of the things dolphins do...

 

 

Martin

[hh5]

I don't know.... some of the things dolphins do...

Martin

 

video-homosexual-dolphins

 

Now the good question can one find A-sexual animals?

[clumber]

I think there are some fish that count as asexual by the scientific meaning but not sure about within the context of this discussion...

 

I suppose it is one of those things which would be very hard to detect because without communication it is difficult to tell if Mr Badger is actually asexual or just not getting laid.

 

Martin

[JamesSavik]

I'm one that tends to take scientific terms at their meaning.

 

Asexual refers to the reproductive habits of microorganisms. When they have stored enough energy to reproduce, their chromosomes undergo mitosis and the cell divides. It is simply reproduction without sex and is quite ancient. Genetic diversity is achieved by bacteria sharing snippets of DNA by passing plasmids back and forth. This is also how bacteria become anti-biotic resistant so quickly.

 

That is the definition of Asexuality. Period. End of story.

 

Defining "asexual" as a person who isn't interested in sex is simply assigning a name to a neurosis.

 

Freud said that the only abnormal sexuality was to have no sex at all.

 

The more interesting question is why would a person want to define themselves as asexual and the answers become more illuminating.

• Social pressure/consequences
  
• Religious conflict regarding sexual desire
  
• Family Expectations
  
• sexual dysfunction
  
• Fear of disease
  
• Fear of punishment
  
• Fear of Sexual Inadequacy
  
• Unresolved trauma from sexual abuse
  
• Fear of Loss/relationship failure
  
• sexual paraphylia (interest in sexual conduct that is either illegal or too kinky to find)
  
• physical ailment (low testosterone)
  
• sexual burn-out (tired of sex)
  

[Y_B]

You should not worry about boxing everything off and categorizing it, especially if in knowing a little bit, you assume you know everything. I for one know that I know nothing, so I'm in no place to tell someone else who they are.

 

Think beyond Socrates much?

 

Not saying the universe can be labeled out on a spreadsheet but It's kinda funny how quick people are to jump on the "I'm special" bandwagon these days and adopt this sorta delusion believing they are actually unique in this world...and that they can't be explained in common words and defy communication because there is no good general description known to man that can be accurately fitted to them. Rather than getting rid of labels, I'm thinking this is almost creating an indefinite number of them. (No I'm not gay, I'm a semi-bi-curious -weekend-only-queer-in-denial).

Edited October 1, 2010 by Yang Bang

[Myk]

Think beyond Socrates much?

 

Not saying the universe can be labeled out on a spreadsheet but It's kinda funny how quick people are to jump on the "I'm special" bandwagon these days and adopt this sorta delusion believing they are actually unique in this world...and that they can't be explained in common words and defy communication because there is no good general description known to man that can be accurately fitted to them. Rather than getting rid of labels, I'm thinking this is almost creating an indefinite number of them. (No I'm not gay, I'm a semi-bi-curious -weekend-only-queer-in-denial).

 

Wow...I assume you had no complaint with my argument, since you picked the one part that wasn't the topic and kinda rubbed it in my face there. Is there a reason you 'seem' so bitter? Especially on this topic...?

 

 

Anyway, moving on. In general I agree with what you just said here. Most people want to feel special and unique and tthus not easily labelled. You are right, its stupid to have someone end up calling themselves a quasi-bi-curious-frappa-choca-latte-whatever. All the more reason that it should be ok to apply 2 simple'labels' if you really want, tht actually fit, instead of limiting people to smaller niches by accepting more words and only allowing one term to describe them.

 

OK, we agree there, but that is way off topic from the gay and asexual discussion.

 

Take care.

[Y_B]

Wow...I assume you had no complaint with my argument, since you picked the one part that wasn't the topic and kinda rubbed it in my face there. Is there a reason you 'seem' so bitter? Especially on this topic...?

 

Because this conversation would never end if I kept commenting on the topic....and because that one part seemed to have been aimed directly towards me, so there wasn't much else I could say.

I don't think I'm being exactly "bitter" about it, but you could call be stubborn if you want. What was mainly said in the last post came to my mind long before we even got to this point in the discussion when someone first responded to me with a content that equated "you're wrong because I know I'm a special case and you won't understand it because you're not me". What a heap of bologna. I'm glad I finally got that out = ) I had wanted to call bullsh*t on a coupla posts for that very reason but hadn't done it.

 

so thanks = )

 

Anyway, moving on. In general I agree with what you just said here. Most people want to feel special and unique and tthus not easily labelled. You are right, its stupid to have someone end up calling themselves a quasi-bi-curious-frappa-choca-latte-whatever. All the more reason that it should be ok to apply 2 simple'labels' if you really want, tht actually fit, instead of limiting people to smaller niches by accepting more words and only allowing one term to describe them.

 

OK, we agree there, but that is way off topic from the gay and asexual discussion.

 

Take care.

 

 

Don't think of it as going "off topic". Think of it as an evolving conversation.

 

 

[clumber]

I'm one that tends to take scientific terms at their meaning.

 

Asexual refers to the reproductive habits of microorganisms. When they have stored enough energy to reproduce, their chromosomes undergo mitosis and the cell divides. It is simply reproduction without sex and is quite ancient. Genetic diversity is achieved by bacteria sharing snippets of DNA by passing plasmids back and forth. This is also how bacteria become anti-biotic resistant so quickly.

 

That is the definition of Asexuality. Period. End of story.

 

 

The thing is that the word 'asexual' may have that scientific definition but the word is also being used by a group of people as an identification as it is the nearest term that fit. Jumping onto one aspect of the scientific definition (because it is one that has spread out quite widely itself) and declaring it the One True Meaning of a word raises serious implications about how the english language can be used as a form of cultural weapon. For example, if a person claims to be homosexual, is it the newer meaning or the original scientific/medical meaning? Newer meaning just means...well...being attracted sexually to the sae sex rather than the opposite one. Older meaning, on the other hand, has the same meaning but with the added defining aspect of this being the cause of a mental disability.

 

It is a common problem faced by a number of groups - how can the language be used to gain acceptance and what barriers are put in place by already ahed words and meanings?

 

Defining "asexual" as a person who isn't interested in sex is simply assigning a name to a neurosis.

 

Freud said that the only abnormal sexuality was to have no sex at all.

 

The more interesting question is why would a person want to define themselves as asexual and the answers become more illuminating.

• Social pressure/consequences
  
• Religious conflict regarding sexual desire
  
• Family Expectations
  
• sexual dysfunction
  
• Fear of disease
  
• Fear of punishment
  
• Fear of Sexual Inadequacy
  
• Unresolved trauma from sexual abuse
  
• Fear of Loss/relationship failure
  
• sexual paraphylia (interest in sexual conduct that is either illegal or too kinky to find)
  
• physical ailment (low testosterone)
  
• sexual burn-out (tired of sex)
  

 

 

The problem with this bit is that to define asexuality as a neurosis with that reasoning would mean that ALL sexualities other than fully bisexual would have to be considered a neorosis under the same definition. After all, what is there in that list which indicates no desire for sex is wrong yet the desire for sex with only a relatively small number of people is perfectly fine?

 

 

Martin

[Former Member]

Kevin Caucher :And I'd love Mattie tell me this. Well, he's the only asexual I know, so...

 

Tiger:Mattie is not asexual. He's a big time pervert.

 

LOL!! And i really have to say that i feel so honored that thanks to Krista!!! (who i now have to send some horrible wedding present) that i'm officially GA's Asexual... ha ha ha Krista! I so love you! and may you & Aaron have hot passionate wedding sex.

 

I do not consider myself an A Sexual. That's a krista word. the same woman who says "Dick Loving Gay" Now "DLG" i associate myself with and quiete proudly! Me and Krista's Asexual joking around came about when i first joined GA around then and how me and her became really good friends and i'm like the virgin gay, no boyfriends no sex life etc, so she calls me her little Asexual..

 

2years later and 2 serious crushes later Krista no longer considers me her A Sexual, though she gives horrible dating advice i might add!. Thank god i didn't spend 8 weeks listening to her dating advice. I did find loop holes to the 7dates rule though . And for 2 summers in a row when i find a guy i like. They end up being Krista's type in men!. So really i cannot be an asexual

 

Earlier this year i made a joke to a few people how 2010 was going to be the year i'd loose my virginity, We are October it still hasn't happened but i got 3months left lmao.

I really don't believe that i'm asexual just that it takes me a really hard time to find a guy that i like, and then when i do it's like a massive head over heels thing. This summer i met someone and who i really wanted to date dispite all the horrible crap going on in my life. It was rather scary that i wanted to date him. I even told this guy that he could be mine. He made a comment about us making the perfect couple. I friggin cried like a bitch when he said that. He's gone, but i'm still trying i know somewhere out there my Mr right or whatever is out there. So instead of A Sexual... I'm a Hopeless Romantic.

 

Hopefully this has helped you lol.

[hh5]

Kevin Caucher :And I'd love Mattie tell me this. Well, he's the only asexual I know, so...

 

Tiger:Mattie is not asexual. He's a big time pervert.

 

LOL!! And i really have to say that i feel so honored that thanks to Krista!!! (who i now have to send some horrible wedding present) that i'm officially GA's Asexual... ha ha ha Krista! I so love you! and may you & Aaron have hot passionate wedding sex.

 

I do not consider myself an A Sexual. That's a krista word. the same woman who says "Dick Loving Gay" Now "DLG" i associate myself with and quiete proudly! Me and Krista's Asexual joking around came about when i first joined GA around then and how me and her became really good friends and i'm like the virgin gay, no boyfriends no sex life etc, so she calls me her little Asexual..

 

2years later and 2 serious crushes later Krista no longer considers me her A Sexual, though she gives horrible dating advice i might add!. Thank god i didn't spend 8 weeks listening to her dating advice. I did find loop holes to the 7dates rule though . And for 2 summers in a row when i find a guy i like. They end up being Krista's type in men!. So really i cannot be an asexual

 

Earlier this year i made a joke to a few people how 2010 was going to be the year i'd loose my virginity, We are October it still hasn't happened but i got 3months left lmao.

I really don't believe that i'm asexual just that it takes me a really hard time to find a guy that i like, and then when i do it's like a massive head over heels thing. This summer i met someone and who i really wanted to date dispite all the horrible crap going on in my life. It was rather scary that i wanted to date him. I even told this guy that he could be mine. He made a comment about us making the perfect couple. I friggin cried like a bitch when he said that. He's gone, but i'm still trying i know somewhere out there my Mr right or whatever is out there. So instead of A Sexual... I'm a Hopeless Romantic.

 

Hopefully this has helped you lol.

 

hehehe - thanks for humoring my wish for an asexual person to give his piece - yes it help -

 

compared to whats been discussed - but never agreed - never summed up - over-debated ... over-cooked ... over-testosterone

 

u made a very good attempt - I hope you do find MrRight real soon but in no real big hurry to run into the countless MrWrong

you're right to point out how hard it is to find that someone - and - it makes us wonder how are those couple are so lucky

 

I guess your post - will have to do until we get a real guest ASexual - to stear us straight - don't have the stats or the odds of having a real encounter on this thread

 

but Mattie - you sure did change those odds today

[hh5]

The thing is that the word 'asexual' may have that scientific definition but the word is also being used by a group of people as an identification as it is the nearest term that fit. Jumping onto one aspect of the scientific definition (because it is one that has spread out quite widely itself) and declaring it the One True Meaning of a word raises serious implications about how the english language can be used as a form of cultural weapon. For example, if a person claims to be homosexual, is it the newer meaning or the original scientific/medical meaning? Newer meaning just means...well...being attracted sexually to the sae sex rather than the opposite one. Older meaning, on the other hand, has the same meaning but with the added defining aspect of this being the cause of a mental disability.

 

It is a common problem faced by a number of groups - how can the language be used to gain acceptance and what barriers are put in place by already ahed words and meanings?

 

The problem with this bit is that to define asexuality as a neurosis with that reasoning would mean that ALL sexualities other than fully bisexual would have to be considered a neorosis under the same definition. After all, what is there in that list which indicates no desire for sex is wrong yet the desire for sex with only a relatively small number of people is perfectly fine?

 

Martin

 

Fine set of arguments there.

 

No argument on the word origins (or the Dan Brown Symbols) - gosh that's sort have been one of the heated arguments next to definitions

 

I think I have to point out that there is no one out there being certified by a specialist to being one of the sexualities(straight,BI,Gay,Les,Transexual,ASexual,hermaphrodite). I believe its illegal to ask sexuality on ground of confidentiality. It so does complicate filling out forms that require it ... unless they put (straight, other: _______ )

 

The point being made is that we really don't know if someone really

* figured out their sexuality

* choosed it

* rationalized it

* have neurosis

* actually not have sexual organs

* lost their sexual organs or sexual drive

* hermaphrodite

 

I can't ask does it really matter ... its buried in confidential ... so what we know could be based on Kensey study figures, volunteered info representing the population, etc ... but never really ask all 300 million ppl their sexuality ... not even on the 2010 census.

 

A lot of argument were on semantics, definitions, arguing the gray areas, etc

 

I wonder if anyone would tell Kensey ... it doesn't matter if you got accurate studies or not ... I got the power of my own studies or arguments or logic or illogic or comedy to prove things.

 

I think I walk away with several answers to the above topic - bazzar, funny, heated, rationalized, defined, mis-defined, confused, etc

 

Approximating or getting the sense of the answer but never truly have an absolute answer.

 

hehe I have not seen a Discovery or Science channel on ASexuality or met someone that is

but I have seen a hermaphrodite documentary somewhere, met someone who is Transexual, etc

 

Nature sure has proved there are hermaphrodite, Lack or lost Sex organs, Man, Woman ... and man made Sexual - Non Sexual creatures on this planet.

The other thing ppl pointed out that nothing falls into absolutes. sort of every color combination on the rainbow.

 

Too easy to be found wrong or right ... very debatable - someone even told me - its not worth argue something debatable

But the importance is to come away with better knowledge than before as a goal

[Krista]

Lol - Mattie's name was brought up more than once. I'm the only one that has called him an Asexual, and that's because I am joking with him. He's not an Asexual - he's waiting for the right time and guy before he unleashes his inner-slut.

[Graeme]

*sighs and puts on his moderator hat*

 

I'm sorry I haven't been keeping up to date with this thread. In future, can people keep their personal disagreements off the public forums? Use the PM system or email, or just yell at the computer screen. You don't need to make the statements public.

 

*takes off moderator hat*

 

Sorry, Myk, but definitions are at the centre of the debate. Without consistent definitions, we're not arguing about the same things. Now, you can disagree with the definitions being used (and I, for one, am not sure there are good definitions for either asexual or homosexual), but that doesn't invalidate arguments based on those definitions.

 

I became aware a long time ago that there are two broad definitions for 'homosexual' being used in public life. I'm talking about day-to-day use, not formal definitions. The first is that of a sexual orientation -- defining what someone is attracted to. The second is that of a sexual act -- if a person performs same-sex sexual acts, then they're a homosexual. This dichotomy is also at the heart of the choice vs inherent attribute debate. By the first definition, homosexuality is an inherent attribute. By the second definition, homosexuality is a choice. I generally use the first definition as I disagree with the second.

 

As for asexual, I'm using the simple definition of someone who has a sex drive that is close to zero. If you think of the spectrum from homosexuality to heterosexuality, and then added a vertical axis for sex drive, it becomes clear that an asexual can be anywhere along the spectrum. Taking the other side of the argument, though, it could be argued that if the definition of sexuality (homo, bi, hetero) is based on what excites a person sexually (is it males, females, or both), then it could be legitimately argued that someone who is asexual doesn't fit any of those categories because they're not excited sexually by either gender.

 

So the answer to the question all comes down to what definitions are being used. QED

 

As for love, I've always liked using the three main Greek terms for love, which can be roughly translated as:

 

eros - love of the body. Also described as sexual love.

philia - love of the mind. Also described as brotherly love.

agape - love of the spirit. Also described as fatherly/motherly love.

 

Based on my definitions, someone who is asexual is not interested in eros, but they can certainly have philia and agape

 

NB: The above translations are based on various novel's I've read and are probably not particularly accurate, but they've helped me understand the various feelings of love I've experienced over the years. Sex and Love are not synonymous. Sex is a form of Love, but it's only one form. There are others.

 

EDIT TO ADD:

 

Oops... I missed page three of responses before I made this reply I'm a little behind, so just ignore me

Edited October 2, 2010 by Graeme

[hh5]

Thanks Graeme for the explanation there.

So I take the topic is a definitions topic but not scientific definitions.

 

Graeme

 

So does below make any sense?

 

I am just going to lay out whats there in life and nature and use some of your stuff

 

But just look at them as variables. I am keeping love in because its part of being a human being.

 

Human Being ( InterSex, Male, Female, hermaphrodite, T-Male, T-Female, E-Male, E-Female )

 

Hermaphrodite - Has both sex organs - but must choose to be male or female, not both

InterSex - No sex organs - but must choose to be male or female, not neither

It really means having parts of either - but I think its non-functional

Transexuals - Volunteer removal of sexual organs with substituted implants and choose to be male or female.

Enuch - Castrated male (or female??) but still chose to be their original sex.

 

Sexual orientation (NoAttraction, SameSex, DifferentSex, BI-Sex)

 

SexDrive (OFF, ON)

 

Love(e,p,a,e+p+a,e+p,e+a,a+p,none) ( Love(eros,philia,agape) )

 

 

To be

a·sex·u·al (-sksh-l)adj.1. Having no evident sex or sex organs; sexless.2. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction that occurs without the union of male and female gametes, as in binary fission or budding.3. Lacking interest in or desire for sex.

 

Defintion#1-ControllingFactor Sexual Organs

Human Being ( InterSex, T-Male, T-Female, E-Male, E-Female )

Sexual orientation ( Not Applicable )

SexDrive ( Not Applicable )

Love( Not Applicable )

 

Definition#2

Refers to plants

 

Definition#3-Controlling Factor SexDrive

Human Being ( InterSex, Male, Female, hermaphrodite, T-Male, T-Female, E-Male, E-Female )

Sexual orientation (NoAttraction, SameSex, DifferentSex, BI-Sex)

SexDrive (OFF)

Love(p,a,a+p,none)

 

Definition#3-Controlling Factor Love

Human Being ( InterSex, Male, Female, hermaphrodite, T-Male, T-Female, E-Male, E-Female )

Sexual orientation (NoAttraction, SameSex, DifferentSex, BI-Sex)

SexDrive ( Not Applicable )

Love(p,a,a+p,none)

 

Definition#3-Controlling Sexual orientation

Human Being ( InterSex, Male, Female, hermaphrodite, T-Male, T-Female, E-Male, E-Female )

Sexual orientation ( NoAttraction )

SexDrive ( Not Applicable )

Love(p,a,a+p,none)

 

Definition#3-Combination

Human Being ( T-Male )

Sexual orientation (NoAttraction, SameSex, DifferentSex, BI-Sex)

SexDrive ( Not Applicable )

Love(p,a,a+p,none)

 

Definition#3-Combination

Human Being ( T-Female )

Sexual orientation (NoAttraction, SameSex, DifferentSex, BI-Sex)

SexDrive ( Not Applicable )

Love(p,a,a+p,none)

 

 

Did I miss one? or did I screw up the model?

 

The good question on Human Being ( InterSex, T-Male, T-Female, E-Male, E-Female )

* If you are InterSex --> do really have any sexual drive

* If you are InterSex and never met a man or a woman --> do really have any sexual drive

 

* If you are Enuch or Transexual --> isn't Testosterone a controlling factor of having a Sex Drive

and aren't you running on learn behaviors

 

 

*takes off moderator hat*

 

Sorry, Myk, but definitions are at the centre of the debate. Without consistent definitions, we're not arguing about the same things. Now, you can disagree with the definitions being used (and I, for one, am not sure there are good definitions for either asexual or homosexual), but that doesn't invalidate arguments based on those definitions.

 

[Tommy_B]

I guess it is hard for me to grasp the concept of asexual, it almost seems unnatural to me. Sex seems to be all I can think about most of the time. Not that I am actually doing anything about it, but it is on my mind constantly even when I am in chapel which is just weird.

[hh5]

That's perfectly fine and normal.

Just as those who are ASexual are doing whats perfectly fine and normal for them.

But its nice to know they do exist and show being human is diverse and infinite.

 

I guess it is hard for me to grasp the concept of asexual, it almost seems unnatural to me. Sex seems to be all I can think about most of the time. Not that I am actually doing anything about it, but it is on my mind constantly even when I am in chapel which is just weird.