• Toes♀@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’ll need that explained more if you don’t mind.

    I thought the whole point of asexual was you’re just not interested in sex or anything relevant to that?

    • Fosheze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Asexual ≠ Not Liking Sex

      Asexual = Not Feeling Sexual Attraction

      The way I usually describe it as an asexual guy is that there’s basically noone I find hot. That doesn’t mean they’re the opposite. It just like a sense I lack or a color I can’t see. I just don’t feel sexual attraction. But I do still like people based on other types of attraction and sex is still fun. For me platonic attraction is the main criteria for sexual partners. It’s just a fun activity between close friends like watching a movie or playing a board game.

      That’s not to say that there aren’t asexual people who don’t like sex because those people do exist, but how much a person likes sex is on the sex repulsion to sex favorable axis and is only tangentally related to asexuality.

      • So, technically speaking, an ace individual cannot find someone sexy? They can have sex with someone for the sake of having sex, be it for bond or pleasure or whatnot, but from what you’re saying they do not show any sexual attraction towards any demographic of people?

          • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            My sexual preference Is “no” and I have to say that instead of asexual because sexual people have decided that the prefix “a” in front of the word “sexual” does not mean “not sexual”.

            What used to be safe spaces for people whose sexual preference is “no” are now filled with people whose sexual preference is “yes, but I don’t feel horny by looking at people”.

            And if anyone dare speaks up they get bullied, called acephobic, and told to just accept asexual people are sexual too and how dare we say please use a different label for that.

            I am far from the only one who’s noticed this. It also leads to things like romantic asexuals (people who want a romantic relationship just without sex) having a harder time than they already did because people are learning “Oh your ace? But you’ll have sex for ME, right?”

            • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Why can’t aces be both? The “sexual” in sexual orientations has always referred to attraction. Sex repulsed aces are like victim-playing US Christians in most of the interactions I see. They bully and make fun of anyone who has sex and then play the victim when asked to not insult others.

              • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Why does it have to be both?

                Why do other orientations get to be easy to understand, but the ones that just want to say ‘no’ absolutely must be comfortable in the same label as yet another ’yes’?

                What is wrong with having graysexuality and asexuality be as separate as homosexuality and heterosexuality?

                Why do people want to force others to be comfortable with what they’re not comfortable with?

                Why is it so important to dismiss and erase people who just don’t have a sexuality that it’s acceptable to take over their one safe word and sexualize it?

                I genuinely find antisex spaces more welcoming than asexual spaces and I hate that. Because people born without sexuality often don’t care about other people having sex. It’s normal, it’s natural, it’s fine, it’s just not our thing. So why do people insist on sexual themes in a community started to be safe for those who are just born not sexual?

                Many of us already feel broken when we don’t get horny as teens. Yes, we’re freaks. We’re weirdos. We’re biological failures.

                We create a space to feel not broken. To vent among others born the same. So why take that away? Why take away the one safe term for people who already struggle with feeling like something is wrong with them by coming in and saying that people who DO like sex are the same label and the ones who don’t want sex at all are outsiders among outsiders?

                It hurts. It genuinely hurts to finally find others like you, to then be told that no, you’re still a weird broken minority even in this supposedly “fitting” label.

                Why is it so important to have a special label that it’s worth hurting the people it was made for to make sure more people can claim it?