Asexuality discussion..

[Washington]

This non Christian says:
It is a sad disability. It's also known as impotence (men) and frigidity (women.)

I suggest this non-Christian crack a book or two on sexology so as not to make another asinine statement like this.

 

[cantata]

Many asexual people describe the idea of sex as just icky. Rather like straight people usually find the thought of having sex with someone of the same sex as unpleasant or just not attractive, most asexual people just don't fancy doing it. It's not fear or anhedonia. They just don't find anyone attractive.

 

[GeratTzedek]

Too Curious:

So what about those people who lack smell or taste? Disabled or not?

 

[GeratTzedek]

I suggest this non-Christian crack a book or two on sexology so as not to make another asinine statement like this.

I suggest this person not presume to think they know squat about me, or how much reading I've done or not done.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't make me uneducated or stupid.

 

[cantata]

Oh puhleeze. So a person who is deaf says to you, "I am not disabled" (and there are actually those that will) you will actually deny that they are disabled simply because they insist they are not?

They may well be technically defined as disabled, but firstly I don't think deafness, blindness, or some other sensory failure is directly comparable to asexuality, and secondly I don't think forcing someone to believe that there is something wrong with them when they are perfectly happy - unless they are harming someone else - is a worthwhile use of my time.

 

[GeratTzedek]

Okay, I've come to a decision. Being bipolar isn't a disorder. There is nothing wrong with walking down the street naked in a state of mania, or committing suicide in a state of depression. If someone who is bipolar wants to kill themself, it is not a symptom of their disability, and we should all support them in their choice.

Sheesh. What illogic this thread sports.

 

[Washington]

I suggest this person not presume to think they know squat about me, or how much reading I've done or not done.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't make me uneducated or stupid.

Only uneducated in this regard. And I have to ask, if you actually are familiar with the subject then why the asinine statement?

 

[TooCurious]

You didn't hear me. I am not saying to order people to have sex. I'm saying if someone lacks the desire, there is something WRONG in need of FIXING.

If someone were blinded, or lost their hearing, would you pretend nothing was wrong? Or would you try to do what you could to help?

That depends significantly on whether the person in question wants to be "fixed"--on whether they perceive themselves to be deficient in some way.

I'll give you this much: if an asexual person wants to be able to experience sexual desire, and if the person's asexuality is causing him or her dissatisfaction or distress, then I might agree that it might be something for which a remedy should be sought. What form that remedy should take is largely dependent on the individual. If the asexual person is happy the way he or she is, though, where's the problem?

And, I could be mistaken, but I was under the impression that impotence was the inability of a man to have sex, rather than the lack of desire to do so.

Too Curious:

So what about those people who lack smell or taste? Disabled or not?

That depends: does this lack impair their quality of life in any meaningful way? Does it place them in meaningfully greater danger? Are these people unhappy with their impaired senses? If the answer to any of these questions is "yes," then I think one could meaningfully say they are disabled. If not, then they aren't. In the case of asexuals, I think the same standards apply.

 

[GeratTzedek]

cantata: our bodies are designed to function a certain way. knock them off balance with too little insulin or too little testosterone, and our bodies malfunction.

So if a diabetic says they have no problem and want to eat themselves to death, you are supportive, since they aren't harming anyone else?

 

[GeratTzedek]

Only uneducated in this regard. And I have to ask, if you actually are familiar with the subject then why the asinine statement?

Your question is phrased so that it damns me no matter how I answer. You are not engaging in rational discussion, but in rhetoric. I'm embarassed for you, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to have a rational discussion with someone that pulls stunts like this. Keep your ad hominems to yourself.

 

[cantata]

Okay, I've come to a decision. Being bipolar isn't a disorder. There is nothing wrong with walking down the street naked in a state of mania, or committing suicide in a state of depression. If someone who is bipolar wants to kill themself, it is not a symptom of their disability, and we should all support them in their choice.

Sheesh. What illogic this thread sports.

Again, I think your analogy is inadequate.

Walking down the street naked in a state of mania is not recommended for the simple reason that it's against the law in most places. If it were not, I don't see much wrong with it. As for suicide, this would be a case where someone is a danger to themselves - ethical issues as to whether or not a depressed person is in a position to make informed decisions about their own life and body are raised by this example, but they are not relevant for the asexual. Lastly, you'll be aware, I'm sure, that the untreated bipolar person is, by definition, spending at least some time being profoundly depressed. This is not just a lack of emotion, but a negative one - one which they would probably like to have relieved at the time, even if not during their manic periods.

If a bipolar person is not a danger to anyone else and does not want to be treated, even between periods of mania and depression, then I think they may as well be left alone. It seems to me that it's necessary for someone to want to be 'fixed' before you try to fix them. Similarly, unless the asexual person is unhappy with their orientation, there is no reason to thrust treatment upon them.

 

[GeratTzedek]

And, I could be mistaken, but I was under the impression that impotence was the inability of a man to have sex, rather than the lack of desire to do so.=.

A man can't achieve an erection if he can't feel desire. To the degree that a man can't feel desire is the degree to which he is impotent. There are, of course, other causes of erectile dysfunction.

It occurred to me to remind everyone that a good deal of lack of desire for sex is due to simple exhaustion. We live in a culture that doesn't know how to slow down. When people are overwhelmed with time pressure, when they aren't getting enough sleep, desire for sex can plummet.

 

[GeratTzedek]

Perhaps the fact that we have laws againt those with mania walking naked down the street is indicative of our intolerance????

LOL, I'm not going to continue this. It's bedtime, and it's obviously a fruitless discussion. I'm pretty appalled that you don't care about those in need, that you do not wish to help them. And that's basically where this ends.

If a bipolar person is not a danger to anyone else and does not want to be treated, even between periods of mania and depression, then I think they may as well be left alone. It seems to me that it's necessary for someone to want to be 'fixed' before you try to fix them.

You are SO wrong. You don't even have a clue how wrong you are, and how horrible it is for you to say this. I'm chalking it up to invincible ignorance.

 

[Washington]

Your question is phrased so that it damns me no matter how I answer.

No. You damned yourself when you made the statement. Don't blame me for your display of ignorance.

You are not engaging in rational discussion, but in rhetoric.

It won't work GerTzedek. Trying to shift the focus away from your folly to how you would like to believe I am conducting my side of this discourse still leaves you with your folly. BTW, you might want to look up the word "rhetoric." It doesn't appear you have a good grasp on its meaning.

I'm embarassed for you, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to have a rational discussion with someone that pulls stunts like this. Keep your ad hominems to yourself.

I do, which is why I didn't use any. Obviously you're simply unable to take criticism without backpedaling away from it. Not an attractive character trait. Nope, not attractive at all. But go ahead and run away. I understand.





edited to add:

A man can't achieve an erection if he can't feel desire.

Please, please open that book. The more you say the worse you appear.

 

[cantata]

Perhaps the fact that we have laws againt those with mania walking naked down the street is indicative of our intolerance????

It is indicative of our fear of the human body, and is quite irrelevant.

LOL, I'm not going to continue this. It's bedtime, and it's obviously a fruitless discussion. I'm pretty appalled that you don't care about those in need, that you do not wish to help them. And that's basically where this ends.

I have great sympathy for those in need.

However, I do not consider happy asexuals to be in need.

You are SO wrong. You don't even have a clue how wrong you are, and how horrible it is for you to say this. I'm chalking it up to invincible ignorance.

If someone is not unhappy and not dangerous, why do they need help?

The bipolar people I know desire to be relieved of their depression when they are depressed. I would therefore support anyone who encourages them to seek treatment. They are unhappy.

Conversely, an asexual person need not be an unhappy person.

 

[TooCurious]

A man can't achieve an erection if he can't feel desire. To the degree that a man can't feel desire is the degree to which he is impotent. There are, of course, other causes of erectile dysfunction.

Nocturnal emissions and morning erections have nothing to do with desire. Men with erectile dysfunction, who are thus medically unable to have an erection for one reason or another, would be unable to have a morning erection. Men who simply do not desire sex would experience morning erections. Thus, these are different states.

It occurred to me to remind everyone that a good deal of lack of desire for sex is due to simple exhaustion. We live in a culture that doesn't know how to slow down. When people are overwhelmed with time pressure, when they aren't getting enough sleep, desire for sex can plummet.

And yet some people, even when well-rested and healthy, do not desire sex. They may find the physical process of it unappealing, or they may not find anyone attractive in that way.

Were there any other portions of my previous post that you wanted to address--specifically, my discussion of what I think does and does not constitute a disability?

 

[Mling]

Your question is phrased so that it damns me no matter how I answer. You are not engaging in rational discussion, but in rhetoric. I'm embarassed for you, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to have a rational discussion with someone that pulls stunts like this. Keep your ad hominems to yourself.

What is a disability? That's the main question you've raised. Well, many people in the deaf community do *not* consider themselves disabled. They have their own language, culture and community. It serves some well, others not so well. But for those it serves...is it inherently "disabled" to interact with the world in a way that deviates from the norm, if a person is *able* to interact with the world without difficulty?

You strike me as somebody who has had very little contact with people who are generally labeled "disabled," and you seem to define it as "anybody who doesn't have what I think is normal."

Well...I don't think of myself as being particularly brilliant. My level of intelligence feels normal for me. But, statistically, it is not, and my experience bears this out. I had true *wit* by about 3 years old, and was considering philosophies by 7 that people in my college class could barely wrap their heads around. Often, if I'm talking about something I find interesting, other people can't understand it. Does that make them "disabled?"

Or, perhaps, is my experience not the standard by which others should be judged?

Why is a lack of desire a "disability?" I lack many desires. So do you. I despise things that other people need to be mentally healthy (such as running--many people *need* to run, I can't stand it).

Who's experience, then, is the measuring rod? Who do we look at and say "If you aren't like this person, you're disabled," ?

How about, we look at the person we're trying to evaluate! Is he healthy? Is he happy? Is he able to interact with others in a way that leaves them healthy and happy also? Are there things he would like to do, that others can do, that he is unable to do?

If a person is living a happy, healthy life, with a reasonable social life, why would they be disabled for not wanting something that other people want? The lack of desire is not having any negative impact on their life.

 

[GrayCat]

Okay, I've come to a decision. Being bipolar isn't a disorder. There is nothing wrong with walking down the street naked in a state of mania, or committing suicide in a state of depression. If someone who is bipolar wants to kill themself, it is not a symptom of their disability, and we should all support them in their choice.

Sheesh. What illogic this thread sports.

Apples and oranges. All the stuff you listed requires outside intervention to the individual displaying it because they pose harm to themselves and/or others.

I challenge you to give me at least one reason how someone lacking a sexual drive (but not necessarily a romantic drive) is harming themself or others. Only one.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

A man can't achieve an erection if he can't feel desire. To the degree that a man can't feel desire is the degree to which he is impotent. There are, of course, other causes of erectile dysfunction.

It occurred to me to remind everyone that a good deal of lack of desire for sex is due to simple exhaustion. We live in a culture that doesn't know how to slow down. When people are overwhelmed with time pressure, when they aren't getting enough sleep, desire for sex can plummet.

That's not true. But thank you for your opinion. Weren't you messianic some time ago? What did you think of it then?

 

[Khameo]

Asexuality is just as wrong as homosexuality.
You were told to "be fruitful and multiply" is the Biblical reason, and the fact that your penis has evolved to actually be used is the naturalistic reason.

So, yeah.