close

Discovered in

Mullers

Mullers
1,593 Favs

Find other sites about

Related Sites

  • No sex please: An asexual life - Features, Health &Families - The Independent

    This article is illustrative, but has a couple fundamental problems. One, as karenzara pointed out, is the base assumption that asexuality is nigh impossible for "us" to understand - this is insulting to asexual and non-asexual readers alike. The second problem - the author assumes the... more

    Reviewed by Isadore Mar 18 2009, 04:38pm ( 16 reviews ) • independent.co.uk

    18K views
  • Showing 10 of 16
  • Reviews of the site
  • Join StumbleUpon or login to add a review! default avatar

  • Reviewed by noidea831 on Mar 28 2009, 9:22am

    There are some real ignorant people posting reviews in here...

  • Reviewed by Parallelchild on Mar 19 2009, 11:18pm

    hahaha, chick feel in love with Rattrap from Beast Wars... i guess it's ok be asexual but what if someone really likes them?? like what if you met this really really wonderful girl and fell SO hard for her only to find out she's asexual... its not like she's gay... but shes simply not interested?

  • Rated by Xzizor on Mar 18 2009, 7:40pm

    This is totally baffling. Speaking in evolutionary terms, homosexuality makes a lot more sense than asexuality. Homosexuality is not not a lifestyle in evolutionary terms, but a behavior that all members of a species exhibit to some extent. The extent to which the population exhibits it can be a control on overburdening a group with too many individuals to support while still maintaining the crucially important and powerful sex drive of its members. But this is the point - homosexuality does not interfere with sex motive, so it does not harm the population to maintain a fraction of homosexual behavior (i.e. it is in balance with heterosexual behavior). This asexual behavior cannot be explained this way at all, because members of the group who simply do not have sex with anyone will never pass their genes. I would suspect that this is psychological and not biological.

  • Rated by Isadore on Mar 18 2009, 4:38pm

    This article is illustrative, but has a couple fundamental problems. One, as karenzara pointed out, is the base assumption that asexuality is nigh impossible for "us" to understand - this is insulting to asexual and non-asexual readers alike. The second problem - the author assumes the term "sex" is synonymous with "intercourse," and then makes conclusions about asexual individuals not enjoying "sex" based on this. If sex (and sexuality) is understood to include the entire range of potential human sexual behaviors, masturbation is certainly counted among them. Thus, asexual individuals don't "lack enjoyment of sex." They merely lack the desire for PARTNERED sex. The distinction is quite important. It indicates that asexual individuals do not lack sexuality - their orientation is simply another of the many possible human variants.

  • Rated by karenzara on Mar 18 2009, 9:32am

    The article is good and bad at once. Good because it deals with an often ignored group. Bad because of the author's prejudiced tone (it's as if asexuals couldn't be understood at all).

  • Rated by Mullers on Mar 17 2009, 6:14am

    In todays sexually driven society you'd be forgiven for not knowing that there are some people who have never been sexually attracted to anyone. Meet the Asexual's.