Not to hijack, but I am now curious. This Kinsey scale–I see it and understand it, but how does one establish one’s place on the scale? I mean, if you’ve never had a homosexual encounter, that doesn’t make you not homosexual, if you follow me…
Re the asexuality: I would think that this is separate aspect of sexuality where it can be a facet of depression but is not necessarily a harbinger of same or a marker for it.
One last thought: it has been my experience that those who have what is called a high sex drive seem to struggle with the concept of low libido or asexuality. Having had a low libido more often than a high one in my life, I want to say that just because someone with a high drive cannot understand or empathize with another person with a low drive, doesn’t make that other person ill or in need of pity. I am catching (probably my own defensiveness from RL experiences here) a faint whiff of “oh, those poor people. We need to get them as highly sexed as we are.” Nothing could be more counterproductive. Just some thoughts.
The Kinsey scale was based on the answers given to trained interviewers during the course of a very long question and answer session. The whole thing took hours and hours to complete. It’s also important to note that one can occupy different areas of the Kinsey scale at different periods in his (they were all men at the time) life. This is why I say that sometimes I’m gay and sometimes I’m straight and sometimes I’m bi. In Kinsey terms, some periods of my life have seen me at a 6, some a 0 and some a 3.
The Kinsey Scale:
0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
So, without the interview, the scale cannot be used accurately, correct? I’ve never had a lesbian sex experience (I have had lesbians come on to me)–but for all I know, I could be a lesbian or have lesbian tendencies–IOW, I wouldn’t claim to be a 0. (not to make it personal–just an example). I am not saying I want a lesbian encounter. I’m not saying I don’t. It’s just never come my way before in any approach that was plausible, so who am I to say? Knowing I am attracted to men, this would make me bisexual anyway…
As postulated by the OP, low libido or asexuality (not at all the same thing but lumped here for convenience sake) could just be lack of opportunity or adequate arousal (whether due to brain chemistry, tepid attraction, natural inclination or the most commonly used one, fear of loss of control/intimacy or deep seated inhibitions).
I am thinking of the author, C. S. Lewis, who seemed to be asexual until his meeting and marriage to Joy Whatshername. His ignorance when it came to sex bordered on the retarded–at least as depicted in the book and the film of his life. But he clearly wasn’t asexual (probably “low” libido). I know it sounds like I’m saying if only the “right” person comes along (Sleeping Beauty being awakened by a kiss!), but that’s not what I mean. Perhaps situations, brain chemistry, natural inclinations, lack of knowledge/curiosity all “conspire” to make one asexual–until Something happens? Or not…
Sorry to maunder on–this has got me pondering stuff.
I think the OP is asking if there are people who, by nature, have no sexual interest, no sexual desires. This is different from the question that some people seem to be answering - viz - are there times that people feel no sexual desire? I think that for human beings, sexuality is very tightly wound up with personal relationships, so that when the conversation appears to be simply about sexual desire, it gets conflated with questions of who one is attracted to, what type of person, what gender, romantic attachments, etc. I would contend that there are very few people who have never and will never experience any sexual desire, but there may be a few more who have never experienced sex - in or out of a relationship - and for whom sexual desire is quite unknown. That doesn’t mean that they are impervious to sexual desire, rather that they have no experience with it, so that they have very little to compel them toward it.
I very much agree with what you posted here. I don’t, personally, see why people’s interest in sex can’t vary quite a bit over the course of time. Also which gender(s) they are interested in. This is not to say that any of these variables are going to change in a person’s life, but that it’s not abnormal if they do change and that this can be a positive or negative or more or less neutral thing (regardless of which state you are in).
Right. Maybe an asexual person (not all, but some of the distinct minority) just don’t recognize the feelings they have as sexual? I’m floundering a bit here because it’s such a basic drive. I can completely understand a spectrum of desire (and even a spectrum on the compulsion to fulfill that desire), but I cannot understand never, ever, ever wanting to kiss, touch, fuck another person over the course of a 72 year old life. But then, I do have some experience with something approaching asexuality–when I have a low libido, I don’t feel bad or guilty for not wanting sex; I just don’t want sex. So, perhaps the Asexual is the same, only more so?
Bottom line: I can understand periods of asexuality, but not a lifetime of it. This doesn’t help to answer the OP’s question, sorry!
I’m bumping this thread because, although I’ve seen the subject of asexuality come up here several times in the past couple of years, I’ve never seen anyone bring up the hormonal aspect.
I’d have been happy to do so myself, but I’ve been an unpaid lurker since…2005? So this is my first chance.
I suffer from a gland problem, and experienced about two years of asexuality because I simply didn’t have the hormones needed to get horny. (I have since changed my medication and my relevant hormone levels are all back in the normal range.) There’s nothing magical about having a sex drive, it’s a physical process and it is vulnerable to physical problems. But unlike, say, the urge to eat or sleep, a person who loses (or never has) the urge to have sex isn’t going to be hurt by it. No one ever died from not having sex, and if you don’t even want it then doing without doesn’t cause any frustration.
I was probably happier during my period of medical asexuality than I am now, when I am not asexual but still very, very single! The worst part about being asexual was just knowing I was different from practically every other 20-something in the world. Well, no, I guess the worst part was knowing that not only was I different, but that I could never talk about this difference for fear of having others make unpleasant assumptions about my past experiences or mental health.
I don’t know how many people who identify as asexuals are that way because of endocrine issues, but I’d guess it’s more common than people who are asexual because they’re crazy, uptight, or naive.
actually, I have to agree with Hostile Dialect. Although Astro may not have intended it that way, his post implies that the part being assumed is that asexuals are gay, and it is being held against the accepted fact that bisexuals are gay. It is like saying
“Some people assume that Joe Lieberman like George W Bush is really a Republican.” Lieberman would be an assertion, Bush would be taken as a fact.
I’m willing to bet that asexuality, especially the kind you’re talking about, from a medical condition that hasn’t been present life-long, has torn apart plenty of marriages and families. I can see why it wouldn’t be so bad if you’re single, but I still think it worth working out why this happens and how to treat it for the sake of those who are partnered or want to be partnered.
Well, and there you’ve hit on the dirty little secret of the psychiatry/psychology field: stuff is only in their domain until we find the physical cause of it. They experiment, and try drugs without really knowing why or if they’ll work, but when the true source of the problem is identified, it’s then a case for the endocrinologist, the angiologist, the neurologist or some other branch of medicine. When we really understand the biological basis of mental function, there will be no such thing as psychiatry.
Sure, but this is hardly news. People can have all kinds of interpersonal problems that are rooted in their sexual behavior. I’m not claiming that there’s no way asexuality could ever cause any kind of problem for anyone, merely that sex is not actually a NEED. It may seem otherwise because the DESIRE for sex can be so powerful, but take away that desire and you aren’t left with much. There have been comments in this thread about not understanding how someone could never want sex, but having been there I can tell you it’s quite simple. It’s not like having no appetite for food, because like it or not you need to eat to live. It’s a lot closer to having no interest in football or American Idol.
That’s not the question here though, is it? My answer to the question in the OP is that yes, people can exist without sexual desire, and with regard to other comments in the thread no, it isn’t necessarily all in their heads. And at least for people like me there’s already a known treatment. Other endocrine issues may be more complicated, I don’t know. I’m not a doctor I’m just a patient.
I wouldn’t assume that people who (unlike me) have never experienced sexual desire would be eager to change, though. The whole mating game looks pretty stupid from the outside, and if you don’t care about sex to begin with then there’s not much to recommend a boy/girlfriend over just a good friend.
I don’t entirely agree (some people clearly have psychological problems that are the result of learned behavior rather than their biology), but that’s not my point. Asexuality is not, in and of itself, considered a mental health problem at all by professionals in the field. The DSM-IV has no entry for sexual apathy. A person can be diagnosed with “Sexual Aversion Disorder”, but that’s described as “anxiety, fear, or disgust when confronted by a sexual opportunity with a partner” (DSM-IV 302.79) rather than a simple lack of interest.
My point was that a lot of posters here seem pretty quick to assume that when anyone claims to have no interest in sex it must be due to psychological issues. I’m sure there are such people, but there are also people who have “no sexual desires whatsoever” for purely medical reasons. To use the OP’s example, while it’s possible that Ralph Nader is a closeted homosexual, was abused as a child, or is just too uptight to get naked, I think it’s kinder and likely more accurate to assume that his (apparent) lack of interest in sex is endocrinological.
