Talk:Asexuality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sexology and sexuality
Sexuality Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Archive
Archives
/Archive 1 /Archive 2


Contents

[edit] Disputed neutrality

It seems that someone has disputed the neutrality of the article, but didn't feel it important enough to justify that dispute. The same person obviously didn't know what they were doing because two points were given demands for citations, when anyone has had read the article would have found the citations in the article (in one case only a couple sentences later.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freunlaven47 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

I've done significant rewriting of the section of research, adding two studies and adding further information about another three that were already discussed. I removed a few (uncited) claims that I did not belive were acurate, but these were not very major. I deleted the first citation, which had been to a book about sexual orientation as a human right. The author mentioned asexuality but did not have good information about the subject. He showed information about only one study, which dealt with a different sort of "asexuality" than he described in his book.

Points that I think need some more work: definition of asexuality. The definition of asexuality given is more or less the one that has been used in all of the psychological studies on asexuality given (except Kinsey). The current definition is people who don't experience sexual attraction, which is the one given on AVEN. The psychological/sexological articles published actually define it somewhat differently. They call asexuals people who experience "little or no sexual attraction" as opposed to none. The Myra Johnson article defines asexuality differently, although most of the women she calls asexual (and that she calls autoerotic) probably fit the other definition, so I think the article should be included. However she does define the term differently. Perhaps another section could be added that dealt with the problems with definition. This could also addresst the compliants of people with functioning sex organs can't be asexual, since the term doesn't mean asexual in every conceivable way. But for people who have no interest in having sex (which is yet another definition excluding some asexuals and including some non-asexuals) "asexual" is the most frequently thought of word. The problem is finding valid sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.17.198.199 (talk) 04:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delete

It is not possible for a human with validly functioning sex organs to be asexual so please delete this article. --198.51.130.254 (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL! Urvabara (talk) 14:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

But seriously even among celibate people they still usually masturbate and have sexual desire, and almost all children go through sexual stages like the Oedipus complex, so this article should be deleted. --198.51.130.254 (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Celibacy is a choice... im not choosing to be asexual, it just sort of happened that way. lol. love between two people is more meaningful when you both don't care about having sex, but you enjoy each others company. People that have a sexual relationship tend to think that sex is the only thing that matters and if you don't have it then something is seriously wrong. they've been brainwashed to think that way thanks to society and the sexual media. (Tigerghost (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC))

The sexual media lol. --67.52.221.226 (talk) 07:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite (2)

I have carried out a reorganization amounting to a more or less full rewrite of this page, adding quite a bit of additional cited research. The article was in a chaotic state and lacking in citations. If I have removed anything of vital importance it can be added back in, but a new structure was badly needed. Paul Cox 02:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Because the article has undergone such basic changes, most of the Talk page was no longer relevant. I've moved everything to Archive 2 so we can start afresh.Paul Cox 18:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alleged asexuals

Only individuals who have explicitly identified themselves as asexual can ever be listed on this article with any degree of consensus. This applies to fictional characters as well as real people. Looking through past edits and talk, more than half of the work put into this page has been sunk into adding, removing, disputing, and defending conjectured asexuals, none of which ever added substantial factual information to an article on this topic. It is indeed often interesting and relevant to bring up a person or character's apparent asexuality, but this is best done in the person or character's own article. From this point I propose that any individuals listed without an indisputably relevant citation be moved to this section of the talk page until the citation is added. Indisputable means the person either used the word "asexual" to describe his or herself, or made another statement to the effect of experiencing no sexual attraction to any gender.Paul Cox 18:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, Paul. I've added an "Asexuality in culture" section for other mentions of asexuality or asexual people in popular culture and added "The Bone People" with a citation to start it off. Citriodora 21:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  • J.M. Barrie, the creator of Peter Pan, has been suspected of being asexual, though this has never been proven
  • Morrissey, musician, was famous for his celibacy throughout his career, but said in a 2002 documentary, "That was the problem with the 'celibate' word, because they don't consider for a moment that you'd rather not be, but you just are. I was just never a sexual person. Never."[1]
  • Gary Coleman, famous for Diff'rent Strokes
  • Paul Erdős, famous itinerant and mathematician, can arguably be called asexual.
  • Ralph Nader, Green politician —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pollen (talk •
    • alleged citations for Nader's asexuality [2] [3]

contribs) 20:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

  1. ^ Morrissey. (2002). The Importance of Being Morrissey [TV-Documentary].
  2. ^ http://ralphnaderdocumentary.com/news.cfm?WhatID=79
  3. ^ http://www.salon.com/bc/1999/01/26bc.html
  4. ^ http://www.nndb.com/people/864/000024792/

[edit] Criticism

As the first paragraph of this section explains, these are not sourced criticisms (as there is no actual research to point to) but commonly heard reactions to the asexual identity. The article is conspicuously incomplete without these, as they are a common part of any discussion of asexuality. If others have a better, more neutral, or more substantiated way of addressing these perspectives, please re-word or relocate these, but do not simply remove the whole section or the article appears paper thin and one-sided to anyone who has jumped to these conclusion themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pollen (talk • contribs) 23:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I see the problem, but it's wikipedia's policy that "articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Maybe you can dig through some news sources. Fireplace 23:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

To be honest I think the criticism page is pretty well done and just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean they're aren't valid.

Hmm.... perhaps I'll give it a try. I will post my suggestion for a rewrite of the criticism section here on the talk page. Let's see how it goes. Albert Wincentz 18:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The criticisms listed are common enough in literature and articles about asexuality as well as the asexual community that they might be considered common knowledge. They are brought up in the Melby article, so I've removed the citation needed tags and added more footnotes pointing to that source. It's really inelegant, but ideally that will clear things up for now. Citriodora 08:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced sections

I've moved three sections (below) here, pending citations. Fireplace 19:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

That seemed like a very hasty move to Talk, particularly considering the scarcity of published work on asexuality and the time and effort it takes to find reliable sources for this subject. I've made a good start on rewriting and sourcing those sections, so I'm moving them back to the light of day, sans flags. They still need work but they're sourced now and as they're all important parts of the article they should be visible. I'm also moving the individual removed from "famous asexuals" to the Talk page's "alleged asexuals" section above, per Paul's earlier guideline for this article. Citriodora 21:24, 18 September 2007

(UTC)


[edit] Delete

I personally don't think that it is possible for a person with normal sexual organs to be completely and totally devoid of sexual and even this article says that most of these "asexuals" admit that they masturbate, which would mean that they must have some sexual desire, so it probably isn't possible to be completely asexual. So since it is impossible to be asexual I think this bogus article should be deleted. --198.51.130.254 14:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The validity of an article on Wikipedia is based on notablility, not your personal views on the concept's truth. Wikipedia also has articles on bigfoot, time travel, God, and world peace, though many people argue that these things are impossible as well. If you can find any citeable materials stating that any person with sexual organs must have a sexual orientation, please add it into the article, as this would be a valuable addition. --Paul Cox 13:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I am asexual, i don't masturbate, i have no interest in sex of any kind, so am i impossible?DAVID CAT 22:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Just because you can't defeat your sexual desires doesn't mean everyone else can't. 70.59.7.115 14:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
That sentence doesn't make sense DAVID CAT 20:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I can think of good reasons to want to "defeat your sexual desires". But I would guess that real asexuals don't have sexual desires to defeat, and some probably would prefer to have sexual desires. 99.233.20.151 (talk) 14:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What the Hell?

Note that asexuality is not the same as celibacy, which is the deliberate abstention from sexual activity; many asexuals do have sex, and most celibates are not asexual. What is the meaning of "many asexuals do have sex"? How can they and why do they have sex if they get no pleasure, attraction, or interest out of it. They're not doing it for pro-creation purposes I'm sure. 70.59.7.115 14:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that there are a number of inaccuracies in the article that need to be addressed. The statement that "many asexuals do have sex", for example, is lacking a citation, and is most likely incorrect. I am working on a sourced rewrite of the criticism section, largely for similar reasons, as much of the criticism currently is based on a misconception of what asexuality actually is; it is referred to as involuntary loss of sexual function in otherwise sexual people, while self-identified asexuals usually are not impotent, merely preferring non-sexual outlets for intimacy/friendship instead. Albert Wincentz 18:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
To anonymous and Albert both: "How can they" is just like everybody else. Asexuality is not a physiological inability to have sex. "Why do they" is more complex, and delves into questions of social pressure, having romantic relationships in a society that defines intimacy through sex, and yes, in some cases procreation--I think we can all agree that the human desires for sex and for children are somewhat divorced from each other. Many asexual people do have or want children. Speaking of that troublesome "many," the statement "many asexuals do have sex" was likely written by someone within the asexual community speaking from an internal point of view. Many of the asexual people on the AVEN messageboard have had or are in sexual relationships, for example, though internet forum discussions are clearly not citable sources. Note, "many" does not mean "most" or "all." Anwyay, I'm sure the topic's been covered in some of the scientific literature or media pieces, so I'll see if I can find something to source that statement. Citriodora 23:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Issac Netwon

There are, in fact, several sources which can be used to back up the assertion that, at the very least, he was very likely to have been an asexual. According to this article, for example, historical accounts indicate that Newton was noted by his contemporaries of lacking any kind of romantic or sexual interest in either men or women:

Many friends of Isaac Newton believed he was just too into his work to notice women, or even men for that matter. Isaac Newton was such an accomplished person in every respect that it was just assumed that maybe he couldn't make time for romance. But, those who were closest to him realized that he seemed to lack sexual attraction or even a desire for sex. Close friends and family knew that Isaac Newton just wasn't quite like everyone else, but in 1727 when he died there wasn't much data about asexuality so he sort of died as a sexual and social mystery in many people's minds.

While it is true that there are no direct evidence of his asexuality (such as him personally stating that he is one), one has to also consider the fact that there was no such term back then and all available details on his bio provide obvious clues that he would have been most certainly labeled asexual had he lived in our times. Perhaps stating that he was an "alleged", "likely" or "suspected" asexual could prove to be a viable alternative? Or, perhaps we can create another section, entitled "Alleged famous asexuals"? Albert Wincentz (talk) 01:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Albert, I moved Newton here because NNDB is a highly disputed source. I've also read various things about Newton's suspected asexuality, but never in verifiable third party published sources.
On the topic of having an "Alleged famous asexuals" section, this is a slippery slope. The old article, before Pollen's rewrite, was almost entirely a subjective list of historical and fictional characters suspected of being asexual. In the interests of sticking to encyclopedic info, I would err on the side of caution and avoid speculating about individuals' a/sexuality. The article you link mentions Ruskin, and I've also seen speculation that he was a pedophile or had a sexual phobia. Unless multiple biographers agree, I'd hestitate to put anything here about historical figures. As Pollen wrote above, such speculation would be more at home in the individual's own article. Citriodora (talk) 20:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In response to criticisms

Being a young(23) asexual myself, I completely agree with the sexual development argument about this. I must however make people aware that like being gay, most people dont see this as a choice they made; it is just a natural way of life. I had a strong libido as a teenager but then it died out. I now have no sexual desire whatsoever. This is related to depression issues as well as abuse issues. I will be flat out, I have been abused by adults of both genders. I think as a result of those experience I am an asexual because of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandanwh (talk • contribs) 01:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)