"Celibacy in a sexualised world"

[ASIC]

The current media feeding-frenzy appears to have alighted, for the moment, upon Sexual Abuse as the next cause celebre, which means that stories about 'Lord Grope' and 'the evil of Jimmy Savile' are being added to the previous rumblings about the perverted nature of anyone who professes not to be engaging in sex. The understanding being, so far as I can gather, that people who claim to be able to do without it are obviously lying (i.e. no one can do without such a basic function), and presumably for some sinister reason.

So this was an interesting article
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2013/mar/04/celibacy-sexualised-world-curious-anomaly
although I know that asexuals emphasise that they are not celibate by choice but unsexed by default...

The modern world knows that sex is the mainspring of all human activity; that it is something to get, to have and to search for; a commodity a bit like money, in that no one can ever quite obtain enough of it.

This knowing is socially constructed, despite the claim that we are uniquely privy to the fundamental nature of humanity, and that this is duly reflected in the social arrangements to which we owe allegiance. It is difficult to argue that the insights solely vouchsafed to this generation of privilege might be nothing more than a temporal imperialism, the triumph of a here-and-now that will eventually be swept away.

Yet we should, with humility, understand that the enthronement of sex at the heart of a culture is only one way of interpreting the world; and that there are other ways of living and making sense of human life, which do not give the same supremacy to this particular – although very powerful – aspect of our existence....

[PiF]

although I know that asexuals emphasise that they are not celibate by choice but unsexed by default...

Say what??????

it's that level of innacuracy that is then taken by those who claim to know the meaning then project it publicly that not only gets on my tits but also highlights why a clear an consistent meaning is absolutely needed about what an asexual is and isn't and to be honest ASIC I'm suprised you even wrote that. I bloody well hope your not pushing that out anywhere.


Who said all asexuals are celibate? many asexuals are very much sex positive and have no issues in making a girl/boy walk bandy for a few days

I am currently celibate CHOOSING not to take part in sexual acts

My asexuality does not stop me taking part in sexual acts, my choice of celibacy does

[ASIC]

Funny, I actually wrote that as a pre-emptive disclaimer against attacks from those who object to being called celibate....

PiF, you've already made it clear you don't consider anyone like me to fall under your definition of 'asexual' - that's fine, I don't consider myself asexual. But since this is one of the few places where I can vent my objections to having sex thrust in my face all the time I wish you would just killfile me and have done with it. Otherwise we are both just going to end up miserable, because I am not capable of posting without offending you. Look upon me as a poor helpless simpleton, if you will.

----------------


What I object to in the media is what I am experiencing as a growing assumption that anyone who can't demonstrate overt copulation must be engaging in nefarious activity of some kind: the idea that simply not having sex is not physically or mentally desirable or even possible. In this context I find the article cited refreshing, although it is not written with asexuals in mind, but with the idea of self-denial in the face of temptation in all aspects of life. (And I think the author is probably right in drawing an analogy between society's need for instant satisfaction in all other forms of consumption and of this - sexual liberation is not a form of consumerism, save in the most naked use of quasi-erotic imagery to make advertised products seem more desirable, but 'relationships' are seen as a way to complete the self and, if they don't seem to be satisfactory, as a liability to be traded up for a better model.)

[PiF]

Funny, I actually wrote that as a pre-emptive disclaimer against attacks from those who object to being called celibate....

PiF, you've already made it clear you don't consider anyone like me to fall under your definition of 'asexual' - that's fine, I don't consider myself asexual. But since this is one of the few places where I can vent my objections to having sex thrust in my face all the time I wish you would just killfile me and have done with it. Otherwise we are both just going to end up miserable, because I am not capable of posting without offending you. Look upon me as a poor helpless simpleton, if you will.

Asic, save the poor me poor me for people who fall for it

as to you not being asexual, only you will know. I doubt you will find however me ever saying to an individual that he or she is not or is. I have said on countless occasions a person can call themselves whatever they want but have asked before you project it publicly as the definite, easy to understand,promote whillst remaining consistent...be sure what that is

as to the simpleton remark then I assume that's your way of going on the sarcastic defensive rather than say you fucked up

on my comment on your wrongfull understanding of the differences between an asexual and a celibate, I was 100% right, you were 100% wrong

I don't know what world you live in but I am pretty sure I do not have sex thrust in my face all of the time and if your saying that happens to you then may i suggest you stop visiting the sex clubs

celibacy and the orientation of asexuality are two completely different things but not according to your description

[KAGU143]

Hey PiF,
I'm all for having a standard, easily understood definition of asexuality but I don't think it's ever going to be as black and white as you seem to want. There MUST be some wiggle room. A linguistic definition is one thing but a practical definition is another matter entirely.
When you're dealing with ANYTHING pertaining to humans then there's going to be individual variation - there's just no way around it.

There no need to get snarky at ASIC, because he said nothing wrong.
Personal insults and personal attacks aren't appreciated here. I'm well aware of the phenomenon that ASIC is discussing and I can promise you that it isn't necessary to go to a sex club to have the "sex is everything and you can't possibly be happy without it" attitude thrust in your face.

[PiF]

I would disagree Nancy on the sex in your face all the time. Like so many things these days people are unlikely to accept responsibility for their own actions by blaming everyone else. Some are overttley sensitive also seeing the "why is everyone picking on me" which much of that is a paranoid self inflicted wound

For most of my life i see sex used for such things as films, advertising, modelling etc but then I am a realist and understand why given we live in a 99.9% sexual world. (No I do not believe we are 1% once you take the false asexuals out of the equasion)..but when I see it i remember I have a choice to ignore it where others see victim

as to snarky, I am happy to be corrected if the statements by Asic are seen as positive things

PiF, you've already made it clear you don't consider anyone like me to fall under your definition of 'asexual'

that's funny because I have never made a personal investigation to your situation personally and thank you for knowing what I think

But since this is one of the few places where I can vent my objections to having sex thrust in my face all the time I wish you would just killfile me and have done with it.

You have vented as have i given this is a public forum are you now saying your allowed to vent and no one is allowed to disagree? Would seem rather controlling nes pas and rather more insulting that having a different opinion

because I am not capable of posting without offending you. Look upon me as a poor helpless simpleton, if you will.

Not true, your as entitled to your opinion as I am and your entitled to disagree...I just won't play the victim because someone disagree's with me, and I'm pretty sure the simpleton comment was sarcasm also nancy..so nothing said????

again I would point out that the promotion of the definition by asic was 100% wrong and I simply corrected that..if not getting your own way means you bleat rather than debate then I hear they are doing group whinge days on aven these days

I'm always happy to listen to others, disagree with others, and talk with others but when the message is incorrect I do tend to correct it

I hope that helps clarify the situation