| 
Posted Sep 22, 2005 by Mrs Zen - has Google Wave <smug>
The concept of asexuality makes sense to me, (rather like algebra, most of the time,  but it does make sense).
I do have some problems with what you have said though, mainly because you say things like 'studies show...' and 'asexuality is...' but you don't say *which* studies, and you do not say *how* it has been established what asexuality is. It's an interesting article, and I have no problem believing it, but as it stands it is either propaganda or opinion. I happen to agree with your opinion, but unfortunately that doesn't make it any more factual.
One thing that I found mildly irritating is your use of the word 'sexual' to mean anyone who is not asexual. I can see why you do it, but I happen to use 'sexual' to define my sexuality for the simple reason that I cannot truthfully categorise myself as straight, lesbian or bi. There are lots of reasons for this, one of which is that I choose not to politicise my sexuality in an exclusive way, and like it or not 'lesbian' and 'bi' have both become politicised. If I am going to politicise my sexuality, I prefer to do it inclusively, and 'sexual' is a more inclusive lable than the others, and I prefer inclusivity in my politics. A third reason is that not all sexual circumstances actually have labels, and once again I ama opting for inclusivity here.
I am definitely sexual though, or most of the time I am, though I have had extended periods (a year, two years even) of contented celibacy which feels pretty asexual at the time. In fact it is my appreciation of the difference between asexuality and repressed sexuality from personal experience which means that I really liked your entry, even if I sound a bit whiney about it.
It's a good, strong, comprehensive and powerful piece.
Thanks for writing it.
B
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Jan 11, 2006 by Fragilis - h2g2 Cured My Tabular Obsession
Haha, you have some mixed feelings there.
I wrote h2g2's edited articles on homosexuality, heterosexuality, and bisexuality. I didn't use exact studies either, though I did briefly reference the Kinsey reports and follow-ups to that research. In my opinion, detailing "proof" is outside the scope of h2g2's short entry format. If you're really interested, look up the studies yourself. They're not hard to find. Based on the descriptions given, I've read most of the myself already. And I haven't been looking particularly.
If you object to the term "sexual," I'd like to see you come up with a replacement term that people would just as easily understand. I can't personally think of one, but I'm not always the most imaginative. 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jan 11, 2006 by Mrs Zen - has Google Wave <smug>
Hi Fragilis
I think you are right, there isn't a term for 'sexual' other than 'sexual', and I guess I should just overcome my squeamishness about identifying as bi.
I think what annoys me about the term bi-sexual is that, like homosexual and heterosexual, it defines one's sexuality by referring to the gender of one's partner(s) - as if their gender is the most important thing about them.
But I accept that that's my s**t, and not a reflection on the entry at all.
I guess we just have to agree to disagree about referencing source material.
I don't think there's any mixed emotions in sometimes being intensely sexual and sometimes being almost asexual. I don't particularly worry about it either way. I just enjoy whatever space I'm in. Or try to.
Btw, have you seen: A4066689 and A3988416 ? Not about sexuality, mind you, but about gender.
Ben
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
