Should We Stop Calling Asexuality Asexuality

[Abidawe]

I personally believe we should because Asexual means you reproduce BY YOURSELF (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexual_reproduction) not that you are not sexually attracted to anyone.

The technical term for having no physical or sexual attraction to any other being would be NONsexual, the lack of a sexual preference/attraction. Not sure if anyone agrees with me on this but its honestly always kind of ticked me off that people are just using the word even though it means something completely different than what they mean.

Do you want to know how to tell if your asexual? Let's use a starfish as an example, rip off your arm and if another being grows from it and your arm grows back then you are definitely asexual. But that's just my opinion, if you disagree please enlighten me on why and what you can use to reinforce the idea that human asexuality is actually a thing...

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

There is a difference between "asexual reproduction" and "asexual sexuality."
The technical term is asexual.

[Alyakia]

but it's blatantly referring to sexual attraction not reproductive methods in that context?

people use things that are technically not correct all the time, including you, so you should probably just get used to it to be honest

[Norstal]

but it's blatantly referring to sexual attraction not reproductive methods in that context?

people use things that are technically not correct all the time, including you, so you should probably just get used to it to be honest

Like, literally, none of us use technically correct terms.

People complain about political correctness, but it's technical correctness that's a problem.

[Cyrisnia]

Unless the virgin Mary herself descends from the heavens and doesn't turn out to be a single celled organism, no.

[Nebalon]

I think we should stop making new terms for every group of person's. Very few people are asexual (surprise I don't counter that they exist; old wives tales about cold and frigid women for example are very common). I just don't think it's something to respect or celebrate... I feel like in an asexual person they're sex organs don't produce/handle sex hormones properly, so they have no sex drive. But surely doctors could fix this? The direction should be in fixing what is absent from these people, not just giving up and celebrating it

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

I think we should stop making new terms for every group of person's. Very few people are asexual (surprise I don't counter that they exist; old wives tales about cold and frigid women for example are very common). I just don't think it's something to respect or celebrate... I feel like in an asexual person they're sex organs don't produce/handle sex hormones properly, so they have no sex drive. But surely doctors could fix this? The direction should be in fixing what is absent from these people, not just giving up and celebrating it

Asexual people aren't broken. Asexual people do not have a hormone problem. Asexual people can find pleasure in sexual intercourse and be aroused. They can enjoy masturbation.
Asexual people just don't enjoy having sex and they don't want it.

[Natapoc]

Yes when I first heard the term I was very confused because my only exposure to the term was from a biological context where asexual is referring to a species that reproduces without sex.

Using the term for specific individuals of an otherwise sexual species to refer to preferred behavior seems to be a stretch.

However, if people want to call themselves asexual that's fine and I don't have anything against it (But I'm afraid my first thought when hearing the word will always be the biological definition until other context is apparent)

I really do think a better term should be used.

[United Marxist Nations]

There is a difference between "asexual reproduction" and "asexual sexuality."
The technical term is asexual.

I'm pretty sure that is why he/she is asking if it should be changed.

[Juristonia]

There is a difference between "asexual reproduction" and "asexual sexuality."
The technical term is asexual.

I'm pretty sure that is why he/she is asking if it should be changed.

Which is pretty silly, considering the fact that you can pretty safely assume that people don't mean they can reproduce by themselves when they say they're asexual.

[United Marxist Nations]

I think we should stop making new terms for every group of person's. Very few people are asexual (surprise I don't counter that they exist; old wives tales about cold and frigid women for example are very common). I just don't think it's something to respect or celebrate... I feel like in an asexual person they're sex organs don't produce/handle sex hormones properly, so they have no sex drive. But surely doctors could fix this? The direction should be in fixing what is absent from these people, not just giving up and celebrating it

Asexual people aren't broken. Asexual people do not have a hormone problem. Asexual people can find pleasure in sexual intercourse and be aroused. They can enjoy masturbation.
Asexual people just don't enjoy having sex and they don't want it.

These are contradictions, no?

[Lydenburg]

I think we should stop making new terms for every group of person's. Very few people are asexual.

Not on NSG, apparently.

Unless the forum just attracts a disproportionate number of ridiculously obscure misfits from every corner of the globe...

Wait...

[Shaggai]

Asexual people aren't broken. Asexual people do not have a hormone problem. Asexual people can find pleasure in sexual intercourse and be aroused. They can enjoy masturbation.
Asexual people just don't enjoy having sex and they don't want it.

These are contradictions, no?

Well, they can enjoy other people's enjoyment.

[Natapoc]

I'm pretty sure that is why he/she is asking if it should be changed.

Which is pretty silly, considering the fact that you can pretty safely assume that people don't mean they can reproduce by themselves when they say they're asexual.

Why is suggesting that a term which better reflects the meaning intended by people who call themselves asexual silly? It seems reasonable to me that one should desire words that best describe the thing one wishes to discuss.

If "asexual" is a non optimal choice for what it's being used for then is it really "silly" to suggest that a more optimal choice be sought?

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Asexual people aren't broken. Asexual people do not have a hormone problem. Asexual people can find pleasure in sexual intercourse and be aroused. They can enjoy masturbation.
Asexual people just don't enjoy having sex and they don't want it.

These are contradictions, no?

Having physical pleasure and enjoying the entire process of having sex is not the same thing.
They can become aroused and have sex. They can even experience physical pleasure. But they still do not enjoy it.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Which is pretty silly, considering the fact that you can pretty safely assume that people don't mean they can reproduce by themselves when they say they're asexual.

Why is suggesting that a term which better reflects the meaning intended by people who call themselves asexual silly? It seems reasonable to me that one should desire words that best describe the thing one wishes to discuss.

If "asexual" is a non optimal choice for what it's being used for then is it really "silly" to suggest that a more optimal choice be sought?

Asexual is the best word to use. We do not need to invent new words and definitions for things that are already perfectly described by existing words.

[Natapoc]

Why is suggesting that a term which better reflects the meaning intended by people who call themselves asexual silly? It seems reasonable to me that one should desire words that best describe the thing one wishes to discuss.

If "asexual" is a non optimal choice for what it's being used for then is it really "silly" to suggest that a more optimal choice be sought?

Asexual is the best word to use. We do not need to invent new words and definitions for things that are already perfectly described by existing words.

Why do you believe that it's the best word to use?

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Asexual is the best word to use. We do not need to invent new words and definitions for things that are already perfectly described by existing words.

Why do you believe that it's the best word to use?

Because unless you want to change all of the words used in describing sexuality, then it is the proper word. "non sexual" doesn't fit because asexual people can and do have sex, and they can enjoy other aspects of sexuality such as masturbation. They are not non sexual.

[Murkwood]

Yes. We should call it "silly".

[Lost heros]

Yes. We should call it "silly".

Well that just seems rather rude.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

Asexuality means without sexuality.

Reproductive asexuality means reproducing without sex.

Reproduction doesn't own the term asexual.

[Dain II Ironfoot]

I think we should stop making new terms for every group of person's. Very few people are asexual (surprise I don't counter that they exist; old wives tales about cold and frigid women for example are very common). I just don't think it's something to respect or celebrate... I feel like in an asexual person they're sex organs don't produce/handle sex hormones properly, so they have no sex drive. But surely doctors could fix this? The direction should be in fixing what is absent from these people, not just giving up and celebrating it

Let me clear something up here. As an Asexual i can and even do have sex. That i'm not attracted to my "partner" doesn't mean i don't have sex with her or that i don't enjoy having sex with her.

[Natapoc]

Why do you believe that it's the best word to use?

Because unless you want to change all of the words used in describing sexuality, then it is the proper word. "non sexual" doesn't fit because asexual people can and do have sex, and they can enjoy other aspects of sexuality such as masturbation. They are not non sexual.

Why is suggesting that a term which better reflects the meaning intended by people who call themselves asexual silly? It seems reasonable to me that one should desire words that best describe the thing one wishes to discuss.

If "asexual" is a non optimal choice for what it's being used for then is it really "silly" to suggest that a more optimal choice be sought?

Asexual is the best word to use. We do not need to invent new words and definitions for things that are already perfectly described by existing words.

How does asexual, a word that most people know and use to mean " a species that reproduces without sex" make sense when describing an individual of a species that reproduces with sex exclusively?

This issue is confounded by the fact that, when used by a member of a sexual species, asexual has many, sometimes conflicting, definitions.

Asexual is also not a term that most people recognize so it's still not to early to change it.

I disagree that Asexual is a "perfect description" of the meaning given to that word by people who have adopted the label to speak of sexual desire. If anything it confuses the meaning greatly (which is why so many people are confused by it's meaning).

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

Asexual reproduction is what prokaryotes (bacteria and archaea) do, meaning they undergo mitosis. It's called asexual because it does not involve sex; rather, the organism splits itself into two parts which can grow on their own (I'm oversimplifying). Asexuality means one has no desire to have sex, and therefore does not have any, so the term is accurate.

Source: AP Biology

[United Marxist Nations]

Why do you believe that it's the best word to use?

Because unless you want to change all of the words used in describing sexuality, then it is the proper word. "non sexual" doesn't fit because asexual people can and do have sex, and they can enjoy other aspects of sexuality such as masturbation. They are not non sexual.

But, as someone else pointed out, "Asexuality" means "without sexuality", so wouldn't the two (Asexuality and nonsexuality) functionally mean the same thing?