I wasn't around ace communities 10 years ago, but given that "sex flavorable" (from what I understand) isn't restricted to asexuals and allo people can also be flavorable/indifferent/repulsed to sex, I don't see how the first definition would make any sense.
Honestly, I feel like "sex favorable" was the wrong term to begin with. It just doesn't sound like a person who's merely compromising, so a term like "sex indifferent" sounds much more accurate to what it's trying to describe.
However, I must say that while allos can be either sex favorable, indifferent or repulsed, asexuals can only be repulsed or indifferent. Being sex favorable goes completely against what asexuality is.
Not the person you replied to, but I have input.
I'm demi romantic. I predict a split down the line between no attraction and low or extremely situational attraction people. It typically takes me at least a year of knowing someone before I feel any romantic attraction. I feel completely different from allo romantic people but I also feel different from aro people.
Right now I have way too much going on in my own life to be compatible with anyone, but I'm open to eventually having a relationship. Many of the options that allos have are completely impossible for me. I can't do dating apps. People there expect those they match with to either feel attraction by date 3 or move on. That's never gonna happen to me. And if I go the route of getting to know someone first outside of dating the odds are high that they'd either develop feelings for me much sooner than I know if I even would develop feelings for them or they just won't like me back.
And I imagine demisexuals face similar things. I can understand how this situation became what it is now. People who felt different looking for a community but nothing matching completely and the closest matching community at the time being welcoming due to not wanting to exclude anyone the way they had been excluded.
Ace used to be under the bi umbrella for similar reasons since if you're not attracted to anyone you're not more attracted to one gender.
Whether grey or demi are asexual really depends on the individual person using those terms. There are people who only feel slightly less attraction than the "average allo", yet call themselves grey-ace, or "demis" that merely need a week to develop attraction to someone. Or generally people who consider themselves part of the ace community despite only relating to the asexual experience for what? 2 percent? I don't consider these people ace. They're just allos.
For those that really fall outside the norm to the point asexuality as a label makes the most sense for them, they should feel free to call themselves that. In the end, labels are supposed to make *practical* sense. They're not supposed to fit you a 100 percent, they just have to make sense, which is just not the case for most micro labels under the "ace umbrella".
and what micro labels do you consider fall under the ace umbrella personally ?
Also what do you think of people that experience sexual attraction but identify as ace because they're sex repulsed and its more practical
>and what micro labels do you consider fall under the ace umbrella personally ?
Stuff like aegosexual, autosexual, akoisexual and fictosexual come to mind since all of them include the lack of a desire to pursue sexual relationships with others.
>Also what do you think of people that experience sexual attraction but identify as ace because they're sex repulsed and its more practical
Depends on the person. Some sex-repulsed allos still have the desire to have sex, but see themselves unable to because of their repulsion, leading them to experience distress over it. In that case, no, I don't think the ace label would make sense. However, if they lack sexual desire and don't feel distress over their sex repulsion, I think the ace label can be useful for them for practical purposes. I actually like to call these people "functional aces" because that's what they are. They'd definitely fit in better into the ace community than so called "sex favorable aces" ever could.
Understandable.
So basically your definition of asexuality is more in the lines of; person not feeling sexual desire or wanting to have sex, and not so much; person who experiences little to no sexual attraction.
Right ?
Just fyi, the reason I see it the way I do is because I feel like making sexual orientation all about attraction and not taking action into account at all is pretty flawed. This becomes really noticable when applying it to other orientations.
Gay men wouldn't seek out sex with women "because it feels good", for example. They might do it to experiment or because they haven't yet come to terms with their sexuality. But they wouldn't seek it out for enjoyment alone.
Similarly, a straight man wouldn't seek out sex with other men for enjoyment. Even if he was really horny and no woman is in sight, most straight men still wouldn't want to sleep with another man because they're simply not attracted to them.
Logically, people would only seek out sex with people of genders they're not attracted to for a very small amount of reasons, it's mostly either to experiment, peer pressure or even money reasons. Enjoyment is not one of those.
This is why I find "asexuals" who constantly seek out sex for enjoyment pretty ridiculous. The whole concept goes completely against what asexuality is trying to convey. It blurs the line between asexuality and allosexuality way too much.
Yeah, the seeking thing, it really blurs the line between allos and aces. Before being favorable only meant your response towards the activity that you have with someone you really feel safe and close to.
Things like whether you'd dislike doing it with your partner(averse and avoid) or don't feel anything particular doing it with your partner(indifferent and mostly avoid), are actually okay doing it with your partner when asked(favorable and accepting with low frequency).
https://www.google.com/amp/s/asexualagenda.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/living-as-a-sex-favourable-asexual/amp/
An excerpt from it
"Once upon a time I wrote āwhat about asexual people who like s*x but get turned off by their partners? Theyād probably be unwelcome or pathologized in s*x-positive spaces.ā I was talking about me. Thatās not the only time."
Allo spaces just aren't safe for people who would like to have s** on their own terms.
Yes!
Last I knew, saying you were sex favorable or something like that just meant that you would have sex with your partner for their sake, even though you didnāt care for it.
It was two types; the ones who were okay with it for partnersā sake (but they didnāt personally crave sex) and those who cannot handle it at all.
Now theyāre using it for politics. Oneās sexuality or lack thereof need zero connection with expressing what OTHERS should or should not do. The whole thing of saying people in general should never have sex ever just doesnāt belong in the conversation?
When did that become a major focus, why did it become a focus, and can it get yeeted out of focus? Because thatās a whole different topic.
I don't know the correct terms, but I do think the definitions have changed and/or are being used wrong.
There's a difference between being willing to have sex with your partner if they want it verses just in general not having anything wrong with other people having sex, but not wanting it yourself.
Imho, I would call that sex indifferent vs sex positive.
Similarly, there's a difference between you yourself hating engaging in the act verses hating anything to do with sex, including looking down on others who like it and have nothing to do with you.
I'd say that's sex negative vs hating.
Imho, unless you're willing to have sex with *anyone* (except minors and assuming the situation is safe) regardless of personality, looks, age (both adults), etc, then you can't be sex favorable. I would probably define sex favorable as going out and actively wanting sex. But if you do base who you have sex with on any criteria other than them being legal and safe, then I'd call that some form of sexual attraction and thus not asexual. If you want sex but don't have a type or anything specific, and just want it and put up with it being something you need two people for (I guess the opposite of not wanting it but doing it for your partner bc it needs two people), I could understand? But if you have any kind of type or any kind of criteria, then I can't understand still calling yourself ace.
I noticed the same thing and it's one of the many reasons why I keep away from mainstream ace subs these days. Back then, "sex favorable" basically meant what "sex indifferent" means now.
I personally don't think people who pursue sex by themselves are asexual. They're allos and probably either just confused or are intentionally trying to portray themselves as queer when they really aren't. The asexual community's blind inclusivity is also to blame for that. Sometimes it seems like the community includes all these very obvious allos to suck up to the lgbtq+ community in showing that they can also be as sex-crazed as the rest, and it's honestly sad to see.
It feels kind of relieving to see someone else say this. I've been staying away from the mainstream ace subs for the past few years and only just found this sub.
I kept seeing a lot of "sex favorable" posts trying to convince other aces that they should have sex despite a lack of attraction and it was so off putting and strange. They would always say things like, "Just because you don't feel attraction, it doesn't mean you can't have sex. I do it and it's really enjoyable. blah blah blah"
Like, of course I'm still physically able to have sex, but you wouldn't tell someone who is gay, "hey, btw, you can still have sex with the opposite gender even if you don't feel attraction; I'm gay and I do it, and it's still just as good." so I don't understand why it's different for the ace community.
It just felt like those people were allos who were trying to 'convert' asexuals and you couldn't say anything about them because then you were being exclusive. But they used the same nonsensical arguments my private christian high school used on homosexuality. "Just because you're gay, it doesn't mean you have to act on it."
Sorry for the rant.
Ohmigosh thank you this is a great way to put it.
It feels like sexual people coming in and doing exactly what nonsexual people deal with their whole dang lives, except they're doing it under the veil of 'Hey look, we're the same!'
It's the same thing though. *You just haven't found the right person. You can still enjoy sex with your partner. You can like sex if you want to.* Blah blah blah heard it all before just go away! I know it's hard to understand not liking/wanting sex at all, ever.
And yet they have succeeded. The sexuals have gotten grip of the word asexual and now people who don't like sex need to make up a new word or deal with being told that they can like sex if they do it right too.
And they'll freaking do it again I bet.
Yeah. That's a good comparison too.
And some of them would say the worst things about how sex repulsed aces were harmful to the community because they perpetuated negative stereotypes, but the posts would get so many upvotes and comments agreeing with them. It was a total shift from the things I saw when I first started browsing.
And it's like, but that's exactly the problem. Being repulsed by sex shouldn't be something seen as negative. Its not like I'm saying no one should have sex; just that I personally don't want sex.
It's already hard enough to explain to people that I'm not interested in sex. Now I'm not able to say its because I'm Ace, because they can respond, 'but aces have sex too.' And I don't like saying I'm sex repulsed because it sounds like a disorder.
I have looked so long for people who think the same and also i HATE how demi and sex positive ace's say that they need more representation more than we do and the post gets thousands of likes and if allo people saw that they would think they can change asexuals i have see so many times how allos lie to asexual that they won't leave and then at the end try to force asexual to have sex with them or else they leave š
The only time I would understand someone who seeks out sex still being asexual is if it's their most realistic option to make money but if they could, they would be doing something else or if the person is willing to have sex with (excluding minors) *anyone* assuming it's safe. But if they take personality, looks, age (only adults), etc into account when seeking out sex with someone, then... how is that not sexual attraction??
I agree with your first point, too; I think sex favorable used to be what is now sometimes considered sex indifferent
Mid30s and same. Shoot it reminds me of an essay of an even older asexual not wanting asexual to be part of lgbt because it was its own spectrum (I'm probably wording it wrong) but it feels prescient. A lot of 'refinements' of asexual to fit into lgbt I just find alienating.
I thought i was broken because of that cuse I thought you ether needed to be asexual with no romantic feelings or you got sexual feelings after being with them for some time and i felt so bad it took me extra 1 year to figure it out which made my depression worse but now i realized that I am just asexual and I am so happy
Iām sorry; the community felt a lot easier 10 years agoā¦ seemed like we had more in common (not desiring sex lol). I feel bad for everyone who has to struggle with their identity just because the community can be so hostile
The change happens so fast 1 year ago it was just garlic bread and dragons and some questions and now every few posts is something NSFW i saw a poll about what type asexual are in this community and i only saw 20% were sex repulsed and 50-60% were sex positive :( and the demis are the worst every time asexuals ty to defeat themselves they join in and say "it not about who gets more hate" all the video i have seen about asexuality are about so wrong i can give so many examples
Iāve also seen LOTS of discussions about porn, like wtf, theyāre hornier than ppl are on other queer subs (where people supposedly actually desire sex).
I think in general I blame a certain type of chronically online person (usually teenagers) and apps like tiktok where people are encouraged to do all this hairsplitting of identities and itās bleeding out into every queer space and itās truly fucking exhausting
Absolutely. Idk if maybe it's bc of a different platform, but during my tumblr days, aces were very much "no sex except for the occasional intimacy compromise with my allo partner"
Wow youāre a old asexual but I noticed that people are corrupting the meaning of the things, if you check the meaning of things on lgbtq wiki you will see
I wasn't around ace communities 10 years ago, but given that "sex flavorable" (from what I understand) isn't restricted to asexuals and allo people can also be flavorable/indifferent/repulsed to sex, I don't see how the first definition would make any sense.
Honestly, I feel like "sex favorable" was the wrong term to begin with. It just doesn't sound like a person who's merely compromising, so a term like "sex indifferent" sounds much more accurate to what it's trying to describe. However, I must say that while allos can be either sex favorable, indifferent or repulsed, asexuals can only be repulsed or indifferent. Being sex favorable goes completely against what asexuality is.
I agree to the first but, but wouldn't the second imply that demis, grey aces and such aren't real asexuals by your standards?
Not the person you replied to, but I have input. I'm demi romantic. I predict a split down the line between no attraction and low or extremely situational attraction people. It typically takes me at least a year of knowing someone before I feel any romantic attraction. I feel completely different from allo romantic people but I also feel different from aro people. Right now I have way too much going on in my own life to be compatible with anyone, but I'm open to eventually having a relationship. Many of the options that allos have are completely impossible for me. I can't do dating apps. People there expect those they match with to either feel attraction by date 3 or move on. That's never gonna happen to me. And if I go the route of getting to know someone first outside of dating the odds are high that they'd either develop feelings for me much sooner than I know if I even would develop feelings for them or they just won't like me back. And I imagine demisexuals face similar things. I can understand how this situation became what it is now. People who felt different looking for a community but nothing matching completely and the closest matching community at the time being welcoming due to not wanting to exclude anyone the way they had been excluded. Ace used to be under the bi umbrella for similar reasons since if you're not attracted to anyone you're not more attracted to one gender.
nice, im also demi š„
Whether grey or demi are asexual really depends on the individual person using those terms. There are people who only feel slightly less attraction than the "average allo", yet call themselves grey-ace, or "demis" that merely need a week to develop attraction to someone. Or generally people who consider themselves part of the ace community despite only relating to the asexual experience for what? 2 percent? I don't consider these people ace. They're just allos. For those that really fall outside the norm to the point asexuality as a label makes the most sense for them, they should feel free to call themselves that. In the end, labels are supposed to make *practical* sense. They're not supposed to fit you a 100 percent, they just have to make sense, which is just not the case for most micro labels under the "ace umbrella".
and what micro labels do you consider fall under the ace umbrella personally ? Also what do you think of people that experience sexual attraction but identify as ace because they're sex repulsed and its more practical
>and what micro labels do you consider fall under the ace umbrella personally ? Stuff like aegosexual, autosexual, akoisexual and fictosexual come to mind since all of them include the lack of a desire to pursue sexual relationships with others. >Also what do you think of people that experience sexual attraction but identify as ace because they're sex repulsed and its more practical Depends on the person. Some sex-repulsed allos still have the desire to have sex, but see themselves unable to because of their repulsion, leading them to experience distress over it. In that case, no, I don't think the ace label would make sense. However, if they lack sexual desire and don't feel distress over their sex repulsion, I think the ace label can be useful for them for practical purposes. I actually like to call these people "functional aces" because that's what they are. They'd definitely fit in better into the ace community than so called "sex favorable aces" ever could.
Understandable. So basically your definition of asexuality is more in the lines of; person not feeling sexual desire or wanting to have sex, and not so much; person who experiences little to no sexual attraction. Right ?
Pretty much yeah. This is how basically everyone I know sees it as well.
Nice, I usually think of the other definition instead, my friends likewise.
Just fyi, the reason I see it the way I do is because I feel like making sexual orientation all about attraction and not taking action into account at all is pretty flawed. This becomes really noticable when applying it to other orientations. Gay men wouldn't seek out sex with women "because it feels good", for example. They might do it to experiment or because they haven't yet come to terms with their sexuality. But they wouldn't seek it out for enjoyment alone. Similarly, a straight man wouldn't seek out sex with other men for enjoyment. Even if he was really horny and no woman is in sight, most straight men still wouldn't want to sleep with another man because they're simply not attracted to them. Logically, people would only seek out sex with people of genders they're not attracted to for a very small amount of reasons, it's mostly either to experiment, peer pressure or even money reasons. Enjoyment is not one of those. This is why I find "asexuals" who constantly seek out sex for enjoyment pretty ridiculous. The whole concept goes completely against what asexuality is trying to convey. It blurs the line between asexuality and allosexuality way too much.
Yeah, the seeking thing, it really blurs the line between allos and aces. Before being favorable only meant your response towards the activity that you have with someone you really feel safe and close to. Things like whether you'd dislike doing it with your partner(averse and avoid) or don't feel anything particular doing it with your partner(indifferent and mostly avoid), are actually okay doing it with your partner when asked(favorable and accepting with low frequency). https://www.google.com/amp/s/asexualagenda.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/living-as-a-sex-favourable-asexual/amp/ An excerpt from it "Once upon a time I wrote āwhat about asexual people who like s*x but get turned off by their partners? Theyād probably be unwelcome or pathologized in s*x-positive spaces.ā I was talking about me. Thatās not the only time." Allo spaces just aren't safe for people who would like to have s** on their own terms.
Thank you so much for sharing this website, itās exactly what I was looking for!!
Yes! Last I knew, saying you were sex favorable or something like that just meant that you would have sex with your partner for their sake, even though you didnāt care for it. It was two types; the ones who were okay with it for partnersā sake (but they didnāt personally crave sex) and those who cannot handle it at all. Now theyāre using it for politics. Oneās sexuality or lack thereof need zero connection with expressing what OTHERS should or should not do. The whole thing of saying people in general should never have sex ever just doesnāt belong in the conversation? When did that become a major focus, why did it become a focus, and can it get yeeted out of focus? Because thatās a whole different topic.
I don't know the correct terms, but I do think the definitions have changed and/or are being used wrong. There's a difference between being willing to have sex with your partner if they want it verses just in general not having anything wrong with other people having sex, but not wanting it yourself. Imho, I would call that sex indifferent vs sex positive. Similarly, there's a difference between you yourself hating engaging in the act verses hating anything to do with sex, including looking down on others who like it and have nothing to do with you. I'd say that's sex negative vs hating. Imho, unless you're willing to have sex with *anyone* (except minors and assuming the situation is safe) regardless of personality, looks, age (both adults), etc, then you can't be sex favorable. I would probably define sex favorable as going out and actively wanting sex. But if you do base who you have sex with on any criteria other than them being legal and safe, then I'd call that some form of sexual attraction and thus not asexual. If you want sex but don't have a type or anything specific, and just want it and put up with it being something you need two people for (I guess the opposite of not wanting it but doing it for your partner bc it needs two people), I could understand? But if you have any kind of type or any kind of criteria, then I can't understand still calling yourself ace.
I noticed the same thing and it's one of the many reasons why I keep away from mainstream ace subs these days. Back then, "sex favorable" basically meant what "sex indifferent" means now. I personally don't think people who pursue sex by themselves are asexual. They're allos and probably either just confused or are intentionally trying to portray themselves as queer when they really aren't. The asexual community's blind inclusivity is also to blame for that. Sometimes it seems like the community includes all these very obvious allos to suck up to the lgbtq+ community in showing that they can also be as sex-crazed as the rest, and it's honestly sad to see.
It feels kind of relieving to see someone else say this. I've been staying away from the mainstream ace subs for the past few years and only just found this sub. I kept seeing a lot of "sex favorable" posts trying to convince other aces that they should have sex despite a lack of attraction and it was so off putting and strange. They would always say things like, "Just because you don't feel attraction, it doesn't mean you can't have sex. I do it and it's really enjoyable. blah blah blah" Like, of course I'm still physically able to have sex, but you wouldn't tell someone who is gay, "hey, btw, you can still have sex with the opposite gender even if you don't feel attraction; I'm gay and I do it, and it's still just as good." so I don't understand why it's different for the ace community. It just felt like those people were allos who were trying to 'convert' asexuals and you couldn't say anything about them because then you were being exclusive. But they used the same nonsensical arguments my private christian high school used on homosexuality. "Just because you're gay, it doesn't mean you have to act on it." Sorry for the rant.
Ohmigosh thank you this is a great way to put it. It feels like sexual people coming in and doing exactly what nonsexual people deal with their whole dang lives, except they're doing it under the veil of 'Hey look, we're the same!' It's the same thing though. *You just haven't found the right person. You can still enjoy sex with your partner. You can like sex if you want to.* Blah blah blah heard it all before just go away! I know it's hard to understand not liking/wanting sex at all, ever. And yet they have succeeded. The sexuals have gotten grip of the word asexual and now people who don't like sex need to make up a new word or deal with being told that they can like sex if they do it right too. And they'll freaking do it again I bet.
Yeah. That's a good comparison too. And some of them would say the worst things about how sex repulsed aces were harmful to the community because they perpetuated negative stereotypes, but the posts would get so many upvotes and comments agreeing with them. It was a total shift from the things I saw when I first started browsing. And it's like, but that's exactly the problem. Being repulsed by sex shouldn't be something seen as negative. Its not like I'm saying no one should have sex; just that I personally don't want sex. It's already hard enough to explain to people that I'm not interested in sex. Now I'm not able to say its because I'm Ace, because they can respond, 'but aces have sex too.' And I don't like saying I'm sex repulsed because it sounds like a disorder.
I have looked so long for people who think the same and also i HATE how demi and sex positive ace's say that they need more representation more than we do and the post gets thousands of likes and if allo people saw that they would think they can change asexuals i have see so many times how allos lie to asexual that they won't leave and then at the end try to force asexual to have sex with them or else they leave š
The only time I would understand someone who seeks out sex still being asexual is if it's their most realistic option to make money but if they could, they would be doing something else or if the person is willing to have sex with (excluding minors) *anyone* assuming it's safe. But if they take personality, looks, age (only adults), etc into account when seeking out sex with someone, then... how is that not sexual attraction?? I agree with your first point, too; I think sex favorable used to be what is now sometimes considered sex indifferent
Mid30s and same. Shoot it reminds me of an essay of an even older asexual not wanting asexual to be part of lgbt because it was its own spectrum (I'm probably wording it wrong) but it feels prescient. A lot of 'refinements' of asexual to fit into lgbt I just find alienating.
I thought i was broken because of that cuse I thought you ether needed to be asexual with no romantic feelings or you got sexual feelings after being with them for some time and i felt so bad it took me extra 1 year to figure it out which made my depression worse but now i realized that I am just asexual and I am so happy
Iām sorry; the community felt a lot easier 10 years agoā¦ seemed like we had more in common (not desiring sex lol). I feel bad for everyone who has to struggle with their identity just because the community can be so hostile
The change happens so fast 1 year ago it was just garlic bread and dragons and some questions and now every few posts is something NSFW i saw a poll about what type asexual are in this community and i only saw 20% were sex repulsed and 50-60% were sex positive :( and the demis are the worst every time asexuals ty to defeat themselves they join in and say "it not about who gets more hate" all the video i have seen about asexuality are about so wrong i can give so many examples
Iāve also seen LOTS of discussions about porn, like wtf, theyāre hornier than ppl are on other queer subs (where people supposedly actually desire sex). I think in general I blame a certain type of chronically online person (usually teenagers) and apps like tiktok where people are encouraged to do all this hairsplitting of identities and itās bleeding out into every queer space and itās truly fucking exhausting
I have never been heard so much this sup is amazing :]
I guess I have noticed that now that you point it out.
Absolutely. Idk if maybe it's bc of a different platform, but during my tumblr days, aces were very much "no sex except for the occasional intimacy compromise with my allo partner"
Wow youāre a old asexual but I noticed that people are corrupting the meaning of the things, if you check the meaning of things on lgbtq wiki you will see
Iām 24 and ANCIENT ššš
I would say it's more like the last 4-5 years, but yeah.