LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+17 17 0
Published 3 years ago with 3 Comments
Additional Contributions:

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • giurokozmos
    +4

    I am working on a project that partly shows the History of Asexuals - I look am Kings during he last 500 years and will collect some stories about their asexuality in he mirror of legends (generally claims of bisexuality). I am at present only at a draft level, it is under construction.

  • Indy
    +3

    The only reasonable explanation for the word asexual being used this way is that people heard it in biology class and didn't have the vocabulary to express what they mean for a different phenomena among humans. Non-sexual (or perhaps 'insexual')seems like a far more appropriate term, as asexual has a more definitive meaning relating to a creature that reproduces without a mate, rather than one who avoids reproductive processes. It's somewhat (though not entirely) similar to the difference between amoral (something that is without morals) and immoral (something that goes against morals).

    I suppose fortunately the language does generally maintain the proper idea when speaking about something other than 'identity'. We would typically say, for instance, that two friends have a non-sexual relationship, rather than an asexual relationship (among other differing examples). Asexual is reproductive. Non-sexual is not reproductive.

  • Wenjarich
    +3

    That was really insightful to read for me, as I have a friend, who although has never said it specifically, I truly believe to be asexual. I also believe he still wants companionship (a romantic relationship as put in the article) but I have thought he would really struggle to find anyone a relationship would work with. I think however that he too believes that a romantic relationship is intrinsically connected to sex and so insists he has no interest i relationships.

    If it were true that he had no interest in a relationship I would have no concern about that, I don't have any issue with it. However, every time he explains his lack of interest in relationships it js always with regard to not relating to something to do with sex/sexual attraction and I have one or twice been privy to him admitting an interest in someone before he realises his mistake.

    I just hope he manages to realise there are possibilities for non sexual relationships should he desire such a thing and that if he does, be manages to find someone.

Here are some other snaps you may like...